Brainman Daniel Tammet vs Dawkins on God and Jesus ?

Question

Who makes more sense ? Here's Brainman Daniel Tammet speaking.

Professor Richard Dawkins is currently giving media interviews for his latest book 'The God Delusion'. In a recent one with the BBC's 'Newsnight' programme, Professor Dawkins made several erroneous comments. He spoke about a religious person's belief in a universe containing a god, whereas Christianity (the religion the professor singles out for criticism) explicitly argues for a God *outside* of the time and space He created. It is like asking where the poet is in his/her poem or to expect an artist to be in his/her own picture. All creation is an act of separation.

Secondly, the professor said that religious people did not give their beliefs much thought. This implies that religion and thoughtfulness cannot go together, something I disagree a great deal with. I came to Christianity only after a very large amount of thought and reasoning. So did and do many other religious people.

The interviewer Jeremy Paxman likewise made a distinction between a 'religious culture' and a 'rational culture' but this is only a false distinction. Religion can be rational - some of the greatest thinkers and scientists throughout history were deeply religious (Sir Isaac Newton for one). It is true that religion asks ultimately for a 'leap of faith', but no leap is possible without first some firm foundation from which to jump.

Again Professor Dawkins erred when he stated that Christianity was an invention of Saint Paul's. Paul taught at a time when many still lived who had been eyewitnesses to Jesus and his original teaching. The early Christian community would not have tolerated the misrepresentation of ideas and beliefs that many among them had themselves been witnesses to.

In the course of the interview Professor Dawkins refers to people with religious beliefs as 'faithheads'. The professor knows better than this. Name-calling is no substitute at all for rational and sincere debate.

Answer 1

poor Richard ; you gotta see it from his point of view ,
herec is a dude with a great brain ,who is incarnated in the body from hell
it is so disfunctional most spirits would refuse it
but one ,the anti christ would love it
never having to stand up for any one
being a god on his throne 24/7 ,
and the best excuse with no chance of fair rebutal
the ultimate sympathy card

but the dude is no anti christ ,he hasnt heard of karma ,
he knows god hates him [even if there was a god ]
so what hes going to say there is a god [to blame god ]
no he is too smart for that ,he will convince others to condem god ,; to forgo god of love of life ,as he has to

he cant believe to whom much is given [much is expected]
he wanted to be the smartest man alive [and he is ; he knew the cost , before he got sewn into the skin of a retard ,we all picked a hard incarnation , but we all chose the part we are
even him ,there is a god ; but there also thus must be an anti god [a christ like figure that testifies there can not be a good loving god ,dawkins is it]

he cant know the l;ove of god because he cant see the blessngs and teachings of his flesh and blood made him who he is ,we all are as we are by inmtent ,with out dawkins only half the story could be told
it is usles to try to tell him he was t5he strongest best suited to be the paert he is that allows the real extent of gods gift of life to be given to any one [to whom much is given
much is expected richard.]
in heaven you will be cast in a new body . but all you gotta do is let go that one , use it to build your next permanant spirit body pure
he has the body from hell
some have that for eternity [in hell]
some have it but a brief life time
but no one out clevers god
he made his wish before incarnation
he just now wants the good ,by deney ing god ,which isnt good its vile , evil veiled
would not swap with him , but under stand he did chose

Answer 2

If God exists outside of time and space how does God interact with matter? Where is this argument explicit in Christianity?

Most Christians have revelations or epiphanies. These usually resemble the conversions by brain washing or the results of drug abuse. Definitely not like thinking.

Faith is by definition irrational. Faith is belief in spite of contrary evidence. Rationality is based on evidence and logic. They are separate.

St Paul did basically invent Christianity. before Paul it was a very minor sect of Hellenised Judaism.

There are a lot more false statements in this Tammet quote.
Tammet is a "Faithhead"
as well as a fathead!

Answer 3

i can't tell which makes more sense because you didn't give any Dawkins quotes...

I find it funny too that christians always have to tell people that Isaac Newton was a christian... what does that prove? everybody who lived where he lived in that time was a christian

And this: "It is true that religion asks ultimately for a 'leap of faith', but no leap is possible without first some firm foundation from which to jump. "
Where is the firm foundation?

Answer 4

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/ayc4T

Seconded, I would love to see Billy Mays crucified.

Answer 5

I see only one side of the story, come back later with the other side.

Answer 6

I take it you didn't like what Richard Dawkins said.
Wouldn't you just like to kill him for Jesus sake?