Richard Dawkins sitting in movie theater watching 'Expelled' right now.

[SiTy]

Unless you merely wish to preach to the converted, yes, you do. That he refuses (and uses such a poor example) leaves him wide open to attack that he does not understand what he is arguing against. Understanding aids in any form of combat, whether you fight with weapons or words.

Also, Dawkins doesn't seem to be that good with his scholarship, since his assertion that Christ, as a historical figure, almost certainly did not exist is based on the assertion of someone who is not a historian. Even wikipedia suggests it to be true:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus .

The idea of Christ as a myth is rejected by Bible scholars and historians: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis#Scholarly_response

Hmmm... I wonder who to listen too...

When you're making an argument about scholarship, Wikipedia should not be your go-to source.

And what do his opinions on the existence of a historical figure have to do with his ideas on the development of life on our planet? If you were debating him on the history of the last two thousand years, it might be relevant, but as it is it has zero impact either way.

 

[Joker]

We have no way of saying if Christ was a real, historical figure. Hell, we aren't even sure if Shakespear really existed, let alone a man who we have no proof of, other than a book that also says that a man put two of every animal on a boat...

 

[The Lizard]

Wow, they are advertising the hell out of Expelled on Comedy Central during the Daily Show and Colbert.

So the question is....are the producers hoping to fool the audience for those shows into thinking that Expelled is something other than a pro-intelligent design documentary, or are they just hoping that the audience will go see any documentary that's "controversial"?

 

[C.F. Kane]

Maybe they're trying to bill it as a comedy.

 

[wellsy]

We have no way of saying if Christ was a real, historical figure. Hell, we aren't even sure if Shakespear really existed, let alone a man who we have no proof of, other than a book that also says that a man put two of every animal on a boat...

Corroboration from other sources can easily allow one to confirm the existence of historical figures. Shakespeare's existence is confirmed by such corroboration from various sources, and the same can be said of Jesus Christ.

And the reason I brought up Dawkins' statement on Christ's existence as a historical figure is because he brings it up in support of his assertion that God is a delusion (which I disagree with). Thus, this undercuts him on the matter. It seems you misunderstood the thrust of my argument.

And honestly, SiTy, I really don't much mind what you think of wikipedia. Its good for an overview, yes, and that was all I needed. We're hardly talking about a university thesis.

 

[Agentsands77]

EXPELLED looks like a poor defense for intelligent design, using straw-man arguments to make their case. Intelligent design deserves better, since I've heard one of the founders speak (and he's personally deeply grieved about how intelligent design has become hijacked by over-zealous fundamentalist Christians looking to fight that evil of evils, evolution). Not that I agree with the intelligent design movement, mind you, but it's better than it's been portrayed.

Richard Dawkins is a jerk, though. Atheism needs to find a better advocate.

 

[Agentsands77]

We have no way of saying if Christ was a real, historical figure.

We have no reason to believe Jesus wasn't a historical figure.

Hell, we aren't even sure if Shakespear really existed,

Actually, we are very sure that Shakespeare existed. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn't taken very seriously.

 

[Superhobo]

We have no reason to believe Jesus wasn't a historical figure.

I think a distinction here has to be made - and this probably wasn't intended by Joker's post, still - between Jesus - that is, Ben Yeshua, the Rabbi who's the most logical historical basis for Jesus - and Jesus the "Christ" - the mostly fictional figure of the New Testament.

There is some basis for Ben Yeshua - He was more of a Martin Luther King Jr. type figure; however, there's very little historical basis for the figure depicted in the New Testament.

Actually, we are very sure that Shakespeare existed. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn't taken very seriously.