HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Lordquinton » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Sep 26, 2008, 09:18 PM
Number of posts: 7,882

Journal Archives

what would you do if you were the devil?

It seems that god is powerless to do much of anything, but the devil is still around and kicking, with all the divine power we don't see from god anymore.

I'd give the opressed the power and means to fight their oppressors.... Wait they say the devil is doing that already, god dammit!

About bigotry

Is it bigoted to say that same sex marriage is a move of the devil?

What even are babies?

Straight up hit piece on Daniel Dennett

Daniel Dennett is generally considered the 'nice one' of the 'four horsemen of the non-apocalypse' but some preacher-man took it upon himself to drag Dennett down to his own level, then beat him with experience.

Atheist Professor Betrays Ignorance Beyond Belief

In recent years, so-called New Atheists have become more aggressive and vociferous, and have achieved considerable media visibility. Normally, it rarely pays to argue with them, as their general cultural and historical ignorance means that you have to explain too many basic factual issues to them before you can share any common basis for proceeding. On occasion, though, one of the pack says something that is so silly and obnoxious as to demand a response, and this is one of those occasions.

For centuries, one of the ugliest aspects of Christian and secular culture was the crude stereotype of the Old Testament. Even in ancient times, Marcionite Christian heretics presented the Old Testament God as a violent, capricious monster, who stood in harsh contrast to the loving and merciful deity revealed in the gospels. Jesus, in that view, came to rescue the children of Light from the cruel God who slew the Egyptians in the Red Sea, and ordered the massacre of the Amalekites.

Professor Dennett refers to the Old Testament God as Jehovah. I have no idea why he is using that term, which is a Latinized version of one guess at the divine Name mentioned frequently in the Bible. The form was much used in earlier translations in the seventeenth century, and it is still employed today by some obstinate fundamentalists. Not for many years has it been used by mainstream scholars or translators, Christian or Jewish.


This article really betrays a desperate air of grasping at straws, that last line in particular is reaching about as far as he can, complaining about Dennett's use of an accepted name for the Christian god, probably shook his faith because it highlights that a) he has a name, and b) it's necessary to distinguish what god we're talking about.
Go to Page: 1