Charles Schultz in the "Atheist" video

[Rutapaga]

For me Schulz was one of the greatest comic-strip artists of all time. He drew all those strips himself, not with the help of a studio crew. He was one of the first, if not THE first to use kind of mature themes in a newspaper strip. He could discuss themes like religion, art, science, psychology... I always thought he was a christian, and religious themes could be found pretty often in his work. But on the other hand, he never gave answers, he was always questioning. And one of the regular themes can easily be be taken as a parody of a religion. One of the main characters, Linus, is every year waiting for the Great Pumpkin to appear, but it never comes...

I was surprised to see Schulz in the atheist video, and I think it was questionable to include him there. But that doesnt mean I wouldnt have a lot of respect for his work.

Johnny Hart is quite another matter. I like his early work a lot, but in in older days he has taken kind of militant religious approach. He can still be funny, though. I think it is kind of weird and fanny to talk about Jesus in a strip called BC anyway.

 

[tracer]

Well, at least Snoopy is perfect.

Then why was he always getting shot down by the Red Baron?

 

[articulett]

He seems a bit of a paradox according to his wikipedia entry. He was reaised Lutherian and taught Sunday School at a United Methodist Church, and yet told one of his biographers "that he identified with Secular Humanism"

His thinking evolved. I know it's rare for those brainwashed in youth, but the intelligent seem to have a pretty good chance of letting go of invisible overlords.

While watching the goofy response video they had a relatively good video link in the sidebar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH0rFZIqo8A&mode=related&search=

It comes from this site: http://godisimaginary.com/

but responses indicate that theists may be to stupid to learn.

 

[Lonewulf]

While watching the goofy response video they had a relatively good video link in the sidebar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH0rFZIqo8A&mode=related&search=

It comes from this site: http://godisimaginary.com/

but responses indicate that theists may be to stupid to learn.

Actually, I disagree with "proving prayer is false". The idea of prayer is that you're asking an ultra-intelligent omnipotent, omniscient being to do something for you... and the assumption made in this video is that if he doesn't, he must not exist.

Let me put it this way: Let's say you ask me for a dollar. Let's say that I turn you down, being that I don't know you, and I know you're just going to squander the cash anyways. You keep asking me for a dollar, using each question as proof that I don't have any money at all, or won't ever get money, not noting the fact that I just might be both stubborn and unwilling to give up cash easily.

It's the same thing. It's asking a deity to do something for you, and then using the lack of anything happening as "proof" that the deity doesn't exist. It might just be that the deity doesn't care about you, or at least your prayer for a random dice roll.

I mean, sheesh. Even if I had all that power, I wouldn't want to fudge a dice roll for no reason whatsoever...

Of course, that doesn't stop me from being an atheist, but the logic here seems to be rather silly.

 

[articulett]

Actually, I disagree with "proving prayer is false". The idea of prayer is that you're asking an ultra-intelligent omnipotent, omniscient being to do something for you... and the assumption made in this video is that if he doesn't, he must not exist.

Let me put it this way: Let's say you ask me for a dollar. Let's say that I turn you down, being that I don't know you, and I know you're just going to squander the cash anyways. You keep asking me for a dollar, using each question as proof that I don't have any money at all, or won't ever get money, not noting the fact that I just might be both stubborn and unwilling to give up cash easily.

It's the same thing. It's asking a deity to do something for you, and then using the lack of anything happening as "proof" that the deity doesn't exist. It might just be that the deity doesn't care about you, or at least your prayer for a random dice roll.

I mean, sheesh. Even if I had all that power, I wouldn't want to fudge a dice roll for no reason whatsoever...

Of course, that doesn't stop me from being an atheist, but the logic here seems to be rather silly.

I think that their position (and there is much at their website) is that prayer works no better than wishing on a horseshoe...they have a few videos and lots of very intelligent material at the above link and also here:

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/gumball.htm
http://whydoesgodhateamputees.com/no-atheists.htm
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/summary.htm
(as well as much info at the godisimaginary link which is associated with the above.)

Christians don't have very long attention spans, you know.

 

[bjb]

The video never says god does not exist. It only claims that prayer does not work and miracles do not occur more often than predicted by random chance.

Strictly speaking, it is impossible to disprove the existance of God. However, it is equally impossible to disprove the idea that someone broke into my house last night and replaced everything with an exact duplicate.

 

[articulett]

Strictly speaking, it is impossible to disprove the existance of God. However, it is equally impossible to disprove the idea that someone broke into my house last night and replaced everything with an exact duplicate.

I did it. (Unless you have Capgras delusion...in which case the severing of your visual brain cortex from the emotion centers is responsible.)

 

[Lonewulf]

I think that their position (and there is much at their website) is that prayer works no better than wishing on a horseshoe...they have a few videos and lots of very intelligent material at the above link and also here:

Hmm, come to think of it, I should've thought about it a bit more before commenting.

It seems like they were making the argument of:

Argument 1: Jesus will answer any prayer, according to a passage
Argument 2: Jesus didn't answer our prayer.
Conclusion: Jesus doesn't answer every prayer.

I was assuming it was

Argument 1: Jesus isn't answering our prayers to flip this coin the way we want to.
Conclusion: Jesus can't answer prayers.

The latter is more fallacious, but it doesn't seem to be their argument. My bad.