Richard Dawkins - An Appetite for Wonder (hardback) £2.99 (£2.54 with code JULY15) + £3.99 delivery = £6.53 delivered @ The Works (online) - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
Great autobiography from a brilliant writer, use code JULY15 for extra 15% off which brings the price down to £2.54. Standard delivery is £3.99, but still works out cheaper than buying from Amazon where the book is £12.
More From The Works:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
mikeymike1 Avatar
2y, 4m agoFound 2 years, 4 months ago
Options

All Comments

(31) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
2 Likes #1
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.
3 Likes #2
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol
1 Like #3
Actually cheaper to get it from the Works via Amazon (seems unusual that) .... only £2.99 + £2.80 p&p = £5.79 and there are a couple of other cheaper options ....@ £5.67

Edited By: CyBerman on Jul 09, 2014 08:31
#4
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/qKPQS7J.gif
#5
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

That's exactly what God would say too.
#6
Predikuesi
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

That's exactly what God would say too.

if he existed
2 Likes #7
In his latest book The Grand Design, Steven Hawking writes, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.”

This statement flies in the face of everything we know in science today. Many evolutionists don’t even believe this or at least admit that there is a serious problem when it comes to getting something from nothing. According to evolution, chemical evolution can take place in stars because of “fusion.” However, that only returns us to a very serious chicken and egg problem. 

Either way, both theists and atheists are forced to a position of believing by faith. The question remains: which thesis best fits the evidence?
1 Like #8
ratsdomino
Predikuesi
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

That's exactly what God would say too.

if he existed

He's been hearing people saying that for thousands of years.

Edited By: Predikuesi on Jul 09, 2014 09:53
5 Likes #9
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.
But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

God has given you the brains to fix the table without his aid.
1 Like #10
Classic HUKD members voting a good deal cold because they're too stupid to read a book for grown ups. Idiots, all of you.
1 Like #11
doobidoo
This statement flies in the face of everything we know in science today.

Not true, quantum fluctuation theory has shown how this happens for nearly 100 years!

BTW it's Stephen not Steven.
#12
I have read all of Dawkins popular works and find his conclusions shallow, heavily biased and full of straw men and argumentum ad hominem. Poor show for an ex Cambridge professor who incidentally has lost debates twice against the Archbishop of Canterbury and refused to debate William Lane Craig.
1 Like #13
Dawkins is a biologist, not a debater, not a theologian. He's become the face of "militant atheism" because he speaks out and criticises the lies peddled by the church. As he's said many times, he will not debate the likes of WLC because it gives them an air of authority, it looks good on their CV, but not so good on Dawkins'.
#14
FunkyPirates
doobidoo
This statement flies in the face of everything we know in science today.

Not true, quantum fluctuation theory has shown how this happens for nearly 100 years!

BTW it's Stephen not Steven.


You're quite right it is Stephen, I apologise but I was in a hurry this morning on a late train.

Are you referring to Quentin Smith's
#15
Woops...Smith's vacuum fluctuation theory?
#16
dont feel bad for dawkins, I bet he loves getting peoples backs up. same with gervais. The more you hate them, the more they love it. and at least they have reason and logic and the superiority of secular morality on their side.

I guess a lot of it is jealousy which is understandable. those two would be top on my dinner party invite list. with karl pilkington of course
#17
[quote=ratsdomino]dont feel bad for dawkins, I bet he loves getting peoples backs up. same with gervais. The more you hate them, the more they love it. and at least they have reason and logic and the superiority of secular morality on their side.

'the superiority of secular morality' there's a non sequitur if ever I heard one.
#18
Predikuesi
ratsdomino
Predikuesi
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

That's exactly what God would say too.

if he existed

He's been hearing people saying that for thousands of years.
Yes but does he really listen?
#19
Oneday77
Predikuesi
ratsdomino
Predikuesi
lcassey
Predikuesi
Bit too expensive to put under the wonky leg of my coffee table.

But at least it will fix your wonky coffee table leg rather than waiting for God to do it lol

That's exactly what God would say too.

if he existed

He's been hearing people saying that for thousands of years.
Yes but does he really listen?

Yes, He listens and records every thought, word and deed, so there won't be any excuses when we stand before Him.
#20
And you know this because some superstitious desert nomads finally wrote these ideas down? It was later badly transcribed, translated and edited by successive generations of church scribes.
#21
Those desert nomads have outlivd every nation to come against them: Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, Rome and the Third Reich to name but a few. Their gods and their languages are dead. The desert nomads live on as God said they would as a sign of His ability to preserve the nation that faithfully recorded His words.
When do you think those words were changed? And please don't give me the standard Dan Brown wishful thinking response.
#22
You think the continuation of the Jewish nation validates their mythology? There are many other civilisations that pre-date any biblical chronology and continue without any "divine" intervention.

The bible as we know it now is a collection of oral traditions written down by many anonymous authors over hundreds of years. No original manuscript exists, new finds often contain very different versions to accepted texts. This indicates both accidental and intentional changes to the text by authors, translators and transcribers.

Even the New Testament is not without problems. The four gospels do not carry the names of their actual authors, many were written much later, and not by any disciple or unreliable eye witness. There are many known errors and contradictions, hardly the work of a supreme being wanting to communicate.
#23
nigelwill
You think the continuation of the Jewish nation validates their mythology? There are many other civilisations that pre-date any biblical chronology and continue without any "divine" intervention.

The bible as we know it now is a collection of oral traditions written down by many anonymous authors over hundreds of years. No original manuscript exists, new finds often contain very different versions to accepted texts. This indicates both accidental and intentional changes to the text by authors, translators and transcribers.

Even the New Testament is not without problems. The four gospels do not carry the names of their actual authors, many were written much later, and not by any disciple or unreliable eye witness. There are many known errors and contradictions, hardly the work of a supreme being wanting to communicate.

This is the usual diatribe dispensed by those who have not bothered to investigate the authenticity of the manuscripts beyond undue reliance upon Wikipedia articles and anti-God sites. They say the a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but surely secondhand knowledge is worse. I guess you would suggest that you have 'looked into' the subject of Biblical history and how the book itself came down to us, but from your statements I can tell that you have a remarkably limited and inadequate understanding of the issues relating to the same. People dismiss the Scriptures on every personal level possible, but it is usually clear to see from their regurgitated and banal comments that they have never bothered to read the book for themselves. Therefore, the 'information' you have presented above has been debunked over the last hundred years, even by those who were non-religious, though it still does the rounds on Internet sites and in books whose authors have consistently resisted anything which could disturb their preconceived notions, ideologies and biased viewpoints. Regardless what the subject is, the only way to come to an intelligent understanding of it, is to study it from many and various aspects.
#24
Please enlighten me on how I am wrong. You are appealing to authority of woefully compiled dogma that fails on so many levels. I'm afraid that education and accessible knowledge is undermining religion daily, people will no longer accept the nonsense and are leaving in droves. This nation is now over 50% atheist, it's time to consign the fairytale to history.
#25
nigelwill
Please enlighten me on how I am wrong. You are appealing to authority of woefully compiled dogma that fails on so many levels. I'm afraid that education and accessible knowledge is undermining religion daily, people will no longer accept the nonsense and are leaving in droves. This nation is now over 50% atheist, it's time to consign the fairytale to history.

You are wrong on every level of your Bibliophobic analysis of the Scriptures. You speak of education, but seem unwilling to gain any meaningful insight to the Bible beyond the inverted logic of the atheistic mindset you have bought into. For instance: you mention that many variants exist for the text of the Bible, but disregard the reason why those writings were rejected by Christianity in the early church age. If you were to investigate why, the reason quickly becomes obvious. History tells us that heretical cults started to spring up in the late 1st century onward. The major heresy was Arianism promoted by Origen in Alexandria. He began to tamper with the Received Text (which is supported my the majority of manuscripts) and sought to undermine the Bible. His teachings were very similar to the Jehovah's Witness cult of today. This and other corruptions were rejected by mainstream Christianity. The other (apocryphal) books are really no different from the Book of Mormon that Joseph Smith claimed to receive by Divine revelation or Mohammed's Koran. Each, and there are several so-called lost and recovered texts, that Bible-haters have sought to use to dissuade believers from the faith. Making claims disparaging the authenticity of the Bible without honest research may in someway convince the biased, but at the end of the day, those who promote such can only congratulate themselves for their own foolishness.
#26
This is exactly the problem, you uphold *your* version of a religious text over others with exactly the same appeals of authority. There are thousands of denominations within christianity alone, each cherry picking their own central tenets and upholding them over others and labeling them heretical. The question is, how do you know which passages are "received" and which have been corrupted? How can you know what you believe is right, maybe your wrong and Joseph Smith or Mohammed is the correct version? This is exactly where all religion fails.

As I said earlier, the honest and impartial analysis of the bible reveals it to be a collection of oral traditions, many copied from other religions and myths and written over centuries by a number of anonymous authors. Some changes were made deliberately, many were accidental by transcribing.
#27
nigelwill
This is exactly the problem, you uphold *your* version of a religious text over others with exactly the same appeals of authority. There are thousands of denominations within christianity alone, each cherry picking their own central tenets and upholding them over others and labeling them heretical. The question is, how do you know which passages are "received" and which have been corrupted? How can you know what you believe is right, maybe your wrong and Joseph Smith or Mohammed is the correct version? This is exactly where all religion fails.

As I said earlier, the honest and impartial analysis of the bible reveals it to be a collection of oral traditions, many copied from other religions and myths and written over centuries by a number of anonymous authors. Some changes were made deliberately, many were accidental by transcribing.

I can see from your so-called analysis that you have no working knowledge of the Biblical record but are merely grasping at the already frail straws of ill-informed notions on the subject. Furthermore, your question regarding the extra-Biblical teachings of Smith and Mohammed reveals that you are totally unaware of the basics regarding Christianity and how some people deviated from the foundational truths of Scripture. Also, regarding the afore mentioned gentlemen, I'd suggest that you do not know the history of how each came by their revelations or that they sought to purposely undermine the Bible by misquoting and misapplying the text already in existence. If you had even an entry level of understanding of the Bible and how it came to us, you would quickly acknowledge that certain organisations have departed from the same. You keep mentioning 'religion' and as a result fail to realise that for those who take Biblical Christianity seriously, Christianity is not a religion but rather a way of life. Religion is simply the mechanism invented by man to allow him to ease his conscience and give himself a pat on the back for his good deeds. Biblical Christianity is altogether different. If you did read the Bible, you would find that religious duty and obligation is totally unacceptable to God. It has absolutely nothing to do with what we can do or not do, and therefore the Bible clearly states that man is totally incapable of saving himself, but needs the Saviour who made the way possible. Biblical Christianity stands alone with this message, for all religions teach that man can do something to save himself and appease whatever God they serve. The majority of denominations are religious rather than Biblical, for they are all ritualistic in nature. A simple reading of the New Testament, with its commentary on the Old, highlights the fact that religion is rejected by God. In fact, the Bible reveals that religion is mere superstition. By what you write I can gather that you do not grasp this but lump all belief in God together with religious experience. If you are honest, then you will take time to research this for yourself.
Anyhow, we can go on forever with this, so I'm going to halt my impute there. At the end if the day, each if us have to be persuaded of our own worldview.
#28
I always enjoy the condescending attitude of fundamentalists, their particular holy book is right,and everyone else is wrong or doesn't understand it. Let's start from the beginning, assuming you have a book that is claimed to be the inspired word of a deity, revealed to a single man or group. How can you know that it's true, how can you know it's not just a group of men claiming to have been inspired and committing a bunch of iron age values and borrowed myths from earlier civilisations as a way of explaining the world around us? We now know so little is true, the world is not flat, the earth goes around the sun, there was no Adam and Eve, no global flood, the earth is much older than the biblical chronology suggests.

There's nothing wrong with being good to others, helping each other, it's what makes civilisations work. But you don't need religion or a holy book to do that.
#29
The Bible does not say the Earth is flat, it says the Earth is round and hangs upon nothing (read gravity), it says the universe is expanding, even scientists agree that our DNA came from a single human pair. As for the chronology of the Bible you are referring to the flawed chronology of Archbishop Usher which is centuries old. This is typical straw men arguments used by Dawkins to discredit Christianity. Read reasoned and peer reviewed Christian thinkers like William Lane Craig, C. S. Lewis andothers of their ilk. If we used the same straw men arguments against science we could say that scientists believe that lead can be turned to gold, if we travel over 100mph we will not be able to breathe and that the human fetus reflects Darwinian evolution. Obviously this flawed thinking is old and discredited but atheists still insist that this is how Christians think as it suits their unwillingness to really check out what we believe now based on good scientific, archaeological and philosophical data.
#30
[quote=nigelwill]You think the continuation of the Jewish nation validates their mythology? There are many other civilisations that pre-date any biblical chronology and continue without any "divine" intervention.
"

How many of them were removed from their land and regained it in the face of five superior armies after two thousand years?
#31
doobidoo
The Bible does not say the Earth is flat, it says the Earth is round and hangs upon nothing (read gravity), it says the universe is expanding, even scientists agree that our DNA came from a single human pair. As for the chronology of the Bible you are referring to the flawed chronology of Archbishop Usher which is centuries old. This is typical straw men arguments used by Dawkins to discredit Christianity. Read reasoned and peer reviewed Christian thinkers like William Lane Craig, C. S. Lewis andothers of their ilk. If we used the same straw men arguments against science we could say that scientists believe that lead can be turned to gold, if we travel over 100mph we will not be able to breathe and that the human fetus reflects Darwinian evolution. Obviously this flawed thinking is old and discredited but atheists still insist that this is how Christians think as it suits their unwillingness to really check out what we believe now based on good scientific, archaeological and philosophical data.

ah great, so Christians do believe in evolution then? and that the vast majority of the bible (talking snakes, living in whales, talking donkeys, the world being 6000 years old etc) are all just parables and not to be taken seriously?

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!