za

... almost always the 'best answer' is chosen by voting, and not by the asker? You would have thought that the asker might be interested in a person who has taken the trouble to help them, and the thank them publicly for their assistance. In fact it seems quite rare for this to happen.

Odd that. Don't you think?

What I mean is this. You can understand that believers follow the command of God, or what they see to be his command, to persuade non-believers to their way of thinking. You may not like it, but as intelligent beings you can see why they do what they do. My question is 'What is the motive for trying to persuade believers to become atheists?' . After all, it is quite common for atheists to respect the beliefs of others, even if they don't agree with them. Even Dawkins says as much in his 'God Delusion'.

So what's in it for you?

"We are a Christian culture, we come from a Christian culture and not to know the King James Bible, is to be in some small way, barbarian" (Richard Dawkins)

http://www.kingjamesbibletrust.org/news/2010/02/19...

In his preface, Dawkins gives the reason for writing The God Delusion, saying "If this book works as I intend, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down".

If you read it as an atheist then this question is not for you - the book was well received by atheists at the time, as one might expect.

But if you were 'religious' when you started reading and atheist when you finished I would be very pleased to hear from you. Or even if the book became a significant part of a longer journey from 'religion' to atheism.

I asked for your views on the quotation: "We are a Christian culture, we come from a Christian culture and not to know the King James Bible, is to be in some small way, barbarian"

First I didn’t name the author, which drew dismissive responses, typified by these:

“Being called a "barbarian" by people who still practice mythology in the 21st century is hilarious.” and “For people to be falling away from ancient superstitions is a positive thing. You object to barbarism? Then you should decry a book that speaks of dashing infants against rocks; which condones slavery; which commands that rape victims be forced to marry their rapists; which command people to be stoned to death; and all sorts of other brutal, atavistic things. To hold such a book holy, to consider it sacred and necessary, is to be in no small way, barbarian.”

Then I said it came from Richard Dawkins, and you all fell over yourselves to say that he was absolutely right and of course the Bible is part of our cultural heritage. Such as:

“A correct conclusion” and “He's referring to the way Western civilization is steeped in Christian culture, and referring to the necessity of reading the Bible in order to better understand that society, its customs, mores, and literature. He has said as much before, and I agree. I am, however, still an atheist. In that barbarians are considered to be those that are not civilized, and in that Dawkins correctly places the Bible as a cultural anchor for Western societies, the comment would make sense.”

Here are my questions

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ah...

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Al...

This looks like double standards to me, but I could be mistaken.

If you were asked to put a figure on the likelihood that God does not exist, what would you say? I don't expect it to be very high: but I would be interested to know what a sample of the theists represented here would go for.

"We are a Christian culture, we come from a Christian culture and not to know the King James Bible, is to be in some small way, barbarian" ?

See him at http://www.kingjamesbibletrust.org/news/2010/02/19...

"We are a Christian culture, we come from a Christian culture and not to know the King James Bible, is to be in some small way, barbarian"

http://www.kingjamesbibletrust.org/news/2010/02/19...

If you were asked to put a figure on the likelihood that god exists, what would you say? I don't expect it to be very high: at 50% you would probably better be described as an agnostic. But I would be interested to know what a sample of the atheists represented here would go for.

For uniformity can you give a percentage answer, please?

I am not convinced there is one, but lots of people out there seem to think there is. Now is your chance.