Skip to comments.
A "Brite" Who is Actually a "Know Nothing" (Dawkins: Catholic Church "greatest force for evil")
Discovery Institute ^
| October 27, 2009
| Bruce Chapman
Posted on 10/27/2009 6:46:41 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
To: GodGunsGuts
Dawkins’ bigotry is less about Catholic belief than about his own sense of having a compliant Partner in Progressiveness and facing the prospect of losing it.
He starts out his piece, “The Anglican church has at least a few shreds of decency, traces of kindness and humanity with which Jesus himself might have connected, however tenuously: a generosity of spirit, of respect for women, and of Christ-like compassion for the less fortunat.”
(He means ordaining women and welcoming homosexuals)
and then he goes on to complain of “poaching”.
He's willing to appeal to the qualities of the Christ yet in another breath assure us that accepting Christ's view of God would be tantamount to a delusional mind state.
In short, the Anglican Church is in no way going to pose an intellectual challenge to the secular world view of Darwinism or Dawkins’ atheism and Dawkins would really, really like for it to stay that way.
41
posted on
10/27/2009 8:20:48 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
To: count-your-change
PS Given what you’ve turned up, I’m going to tack on the keyword “homosexualagenda” to this thread. Your good find just got better :o)
To: count-your-change
He starts out his piece, The Anglican church has at least a few shreds of decency, traces of kindness and humanity with which Jesus himself might have connected ..."It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant of Christianity that people like Dawkins are. Of course, coming from someone who thinks the Catholic Church is more evil than Islam that doesn't surprise me in the least.
Perhaps Dawkins should read the parts of the New Testament in which Jesus compares His own disciples to Satan when they question his teachings, or when He curses the fig tree for not obeying His command. Maybe the metaphorical way in which Jesus did things are beyond the ability for a simpleton like Dawkins to understand, but anyone who really wants to understand the Bible can easily do it.
That being said, there are many times in the New Testament in which Jesus takes an approach that ranges between "not so nice" and "bluntly physical" when it comes to correcting people who get it wrong.
And I thank Jesus for that... people like me would not know otherwise if He didn't care so much to show us the way.
44
posted on
10/27/2009 8:54:44 PM PDT
by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: GodGunsGuts
The whole “screed” from The Washington Post should be shown(not possible, I know) but everyone should at least read it twice at least.
45
posted on
10/27/2009 8:58:19 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: mnehring; GodGunsGuts
I never expected to see an article where you agreed with Dawkins.I've been trying to get GGGs to dedicate another thread to me. This would have have been perfect! Whatcha think, Bro?
46
posted on
10/27/2009 9:02:19 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: LukeL
This is why I am no longer a science major, only two years in and I cannot deal with the arrogance, snobbery, and disdain for anything anti-science ?
47
posted on
10/27/2009 9:05:37 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: GodGunsGuts
I dont agree with Dawkins.Then you WILL let evolutionist Catholics into heaven?
48
posted on
10/27/2009 9:06:41 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: pnh102
Dawkins’ contempt for the Anglican Church is clear as goes to add to what you quote in your reply, “however tenuously:”.
Despite the Anglican’s lack of opposition to all of Dawkins’ favorite Progressive beliefs, he still attempts to kill them with faint praise. A real lesson to be learned here: They'll get neither love nor respect for compromise and only the most contemptuous and contingent tolerance.
49
posted on
10/27/2009 9:14:57 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: GodGunsGuts
To: GodGunsGuts
51
posted on
10/27/2009 9:35:04 PM PDT
by
Ira_Louvin
(Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
To: Ira_Louvin
"Send us your women, yearning to be priests, who could make a strong case for being the better-qualified fifty percent of humanity; send us your decent priests, sick of trying to defend the indefensible; send them all,"We tried. But they don't want to leave. They want to stay in the Roman Catholic Church and undermine it from the inside. Poor Dawkins missed it by THIS much...again.
52
posted on
10/27/2009 10:17:03 PM PDT
by
redhead
(They are running SCARED, folks! :o) Check out the Halfbaked Sourdough at mukluk.wordpress.com)
To: GodGunsGuts
“Other than such Know Nothings, what other modern bigots are regarded as so fashionable?”
Mao seems to be pretty popular in the White House.
To: Alamo-Girl
54
posted on
10/27/2009 10:37:20 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: count-your-change
Example of taking God's name in vain:
55
posted on
10/27/2009 10:39:41 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: ColdWater
And why is this of interest to me?
56
posted on
10/27/2009 10:48:37 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
And why is this of interest to me?Perhaps you should be asking yourself why it is NOT of interest to you.
57
posted on
10/27/2009 10:51:34 PM PDT
by
ColdWater
("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
To: ColdWater
I am referring to the fact that it has now become part of science to openly mock the Bible, Christians, and alternatives theories that are not mainstream. Just try and mention nutrition therapy on a science blog, or criticize the H1N1 vaccine. You will be called a nut, a fundamentalist, for killing children for starters.
58
posted on
10/27/2009 10:58:51 PM PDT
by
LukeL
(Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
To: ColdWater
O.k., I’ve asked myself.
59
posted on
10/27/2009 11:03:33 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: mnehring
60
posted on
10/28/2009 4:32:40 AM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson