Author Topic: kudos on your site [#742]  (Read 815 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DL

kudos on your site [#742]
« on: November 28, 2008, 08:43:23 PM »
Hi, I just went thru whywontgodhealamputees.com and godisimaginary.com and I just
have to say your arguments and writing are lucid, entertaining and should be
required reading for all humans. Excellent work, thanks for being so eloquent for
those of us who feel the same way but just don't have the verbal ammunition!
 
Cheers,
[name]

Offline GotMooo

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2008, 08:51:37 PM »
That's how I felt about these two sites myself.  Feel free to come register at the forums and chat if you'd like!  Always great to have more rational people around.

Offline DL

Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2008, 07:06:36 PM »
OP responds via email:

---

Hi,
 
I'm totally addicted to the site, btw and I'm recommending the site to all of my lucid friends and colleagues (not sure how religious friends would take my suggestion to go there - maybe you should have an "concerned friend" mailer on your site to allow people like me to anonymously send your site to people who would take it personally ;-)
 
I have a suggestion for fleshing out your argument on the "resurrection" (Chapter 20 http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god20.htm)
 
As is well documented, the resurrection myth is not unique (for example http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa052902a.htm and there are a few that list many prior religions that have similar myths but the links currently escape me). In fact, prior religions had: virgin diety birth in a cave on the winter solstice and easter rituals including the whole 3 day death, descent into hell and resurrection. "Paul" (if such a person even existed, from what I've read, there's good reason to believe that most of the "writers" of the bible were separate nameless individuals collaborating under a single pen) wasn't likely lying but just passing on a well-tread story.
 
Anyway, keep up the great work!
 
Thanks,
[name]

Offline GotMooo

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2008, 10:23:13 PM »
If you are interested in talking about religions/Gods of the past and how they are authored and etc, I would recommend you sign up and chat at this new thread:  http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=2759.0

Also, the creator of this site, Marshall Brain, has just today posted that he is going to expand GodIsImaginary.com and will add 10 new reasons in the next few weeks.  You can post any suggestions/improvements like you just said to the blog here:  http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?p=287#comments  You don't need to register at the blog either.

Offline Irish

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3152
  • Darwins +18/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Moraxella catarrhalis on BA
Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2008, 01:06:20 AM »
Why don't you go ahead and sign up on this forum OP?  It's free and and you can make yourself anonymous.  You seem to have a "level head" that would only add to the populace here.

Also, GotMooo posted links where you can suggest additions to the 50 proofs (I guess now they will become the 60 proofs)
La scienze non ha nemici ma gli ignoranti.

Offline GotMooo

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2008, 01:29:18 AM »
It looks like it will stay "50 Proofs" and the 10 new ones being worked on right now are going to be all bonuses.

Offline Irish

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3152
  • Darwins +18/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Moraxella catarrhalis on BA
Re: kudos on your site [#742]
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2008, 01:32:30 AM »
So it's not going to be considered the "60 proofs" but the "50 +10 proofs".  Sounds fine by me.
La scienze non ha nemici ma gli ignoranti.