1. St. Peter's
    Joined
    06 Dec '10
    Moves
    11308
    08 Dec '10 18:37
    His sophmoric attempt at discrediting the worlds (though primarily Christian) faith traditions falls short of its goal. Instead he comes across as angry, arrogant and shallow minded. His book is full of straw man arguments, half truths, inuendo, and bitter vitriol. None of it amounts to a reasoned argument against intelligent design or faith...so there.
  2. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    08 Dec '10 18:493 edits
    Originally posted by Doward
    His sophmoric attempt at discrediting the worlds (though primarily Christian) faith traditions falls short of its goal. Instead he comes across as angry, arrogant and shallow minded. His book is full of straw man arguments, half truths, inuendo, and bitter vitriol. None of it amounts to a reasoned argument against intelligent design or faith...so there.
    I've read his book and find he is "preaching to the converted" (atheists) and p!ssing off the moderate Christians - the main focus of his attack are the fundamentalist types who believe in talking snakes, a 6000 year old earth etc.. who are never going to accept a logical argument with respect to their theology so long as they have a hole in their arse.

    Trying to reason a person out of a position they weren't reasoned into is the crucial mistake he makes here; and I'm just as guilty with respect to the time I waste bashing my head against brick walls on these boards arguing with fundies. I need to refrain from doing this.
  3. Maryland
    Joined
    10 Jun '05
    Moves
    110416
    08 Dec '10 21:37
    Religion is to an adult as a doll is to a child. Comforting, but not otherwise too useful. (Paraphrasing Samuel Butler.)
  4. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    08 Dec '10 21:561 edit
    Originally posted by 667joe
    Religion is to an adult as a doll is to a child. Comforting, but not otherwise too useful. (Paraphrasing Samuel Butler.)
    yes tell that to the millions who have been helped to overcome all manner of ills because of their religion, while the gods of atheism remain utterly impotent, what a noob of a comment, you and Samuel Butler need your bums felt to bring you back to reality.
  5. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    08 Dec '10 22:06
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    yes tell that to the millions who have been helped to overcome all manner of ills because of their religion, while the gods of atheism remain utterly impotent, what a noob of a comment, you and Samuel Butler need your bums felt to bring you back to reality.
    "Gods of atheism" is an oxymoron.

    Anyone calling Dawking a liar should know that there are many religious liars too. More.
  6. St. Peter's
    Joined
    06 Dec '10
    Moves
    11308
    08 Dec '10 22:54
    Originally posted by Agerg
    I've read his book and find he is "preaching to the converted" (atheists) and p!ssing off the moderate Christians - the main focus of his attack are the fundamentalist types who believe in talking snakes, a 6000 year old earth etc.. who are never going to accept a logical argument with respect to their theology so long as they have a hole in their arse.

    Try ...[text shortened]... gainst brick walls on these boards arguing with fundies. I need to refrain from doing this.
    Deepak Chopra takes on Dawkins in an enlightening six part refutation of The God Delusion. His approach is universal, and carries no bias towards any faith group. Though I know it won't change your mind, I recommend reading it anyway:

    http://www.beliefnet.com/Holistic-Living/2007/02/Debunking-The-God-Delusion-Part-1.aspx
  7. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    08 Dec '10 23:05
    Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins.

    William Craig comments on three "New Atheists" as philosophical laymen:

    YouTube&feature=related
  8. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    08 Dec '10 23:221 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    "Gods of atheism" is an oxymoron.

    Anyone calling Dawking a liar should know that there are many religious liars too. More.
    not according to the article posted by Doward,

    But arch materialism is just as superstitious as religion. Someone like Dawkins still believes there are solid objects randomly colliding to haphazardly form more and more complex objects, until over the course of billions of years the universe produced human DNA with its billions of genetic bits.

    What's wrong with this argument is that if you trace DNA down to its individual atoms, each is more than 99.9999% empty space. If you take an individual electron, it has no fixed position in either time or space. Rather, ghostly vibrations wink in and out of the universe thousands of times per second, and what lies beyond the boundary of the five senses holds enormous mysteries.

    http://www.beliefnet.com/Holistic-Living/2007/02/Debunking-The-God-Delusion-Part-3.aspx
  9. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    08 Dec '10 23:22
    Originally posted by Doward
    Deepak Chopra takes on Dawkins in an enlightening six part refutation of The God Delusion. His approach is universal, and carries no bias towards any faith group. Though I know it won't change your mind, I recommend reading it anyway:

    http://www.beliefnet.com/Holistic-Living/2007/02/Debunking-The-God-Delusion-Part-1.aspx
    very interesting, thanks for that.
  10. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    08 Dec '10 23:511 edit
    Originally posted by Doward
    His sophmoric attempt at discrediting the worlds (though primarily Christian) faith traditions falls short of its goal. Instead he comes across as angry, arrogant and shallow minded. His book is full of straw man arguments, half truths, inuendo, and bitter vitriol. None of it amounts to a reasoned argument against intelligent design or faith...so there.
    Thank you for your presenting the truth of the matter, and you are 100% correct.

    Richard Dawkins has put forward all his flimsy arguments in his books, to create controversy, so he can make a large sum of money through book sales.

    He has single handedly made atheism glamorous, and all the less intelligent people have been captivated by his fancy words.

    The thing is he can only attack silly beliefs from false religions, and when it comes down to discrediting real spiritual truth....he is lost, and comes across as a an ignoramus.
  11. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    08 Dec '10 23:57
    Originally posted by 667joe
    Religion is to an adult as a doll is to a child. Comforting, but not otherwise too useful. (Paraphrasing Samuel Butler.)
    Yes true, but that is false religion.......and true religion brings a person to their natural spiritual consciousness, and ultimately returns them back home to the spiritual world, where there is no more birth, death, disease and old age, where their existence is full of bliss and eternal.
  12. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86285
    09 Dec '10 00:03
    Originally posted by vishvahetu
    ..he is lost, and comes across as a an ignoramus.
    I'm don't agree with Dawkins, but he is not an ignoramus, surely...?
  13. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    09 Dec '10 01:45
    Originally posted by divegeester
    I'm don't agree with Dawkins, but he is not an ignoramus, surely...?
    He,s riding on the back of the Darwinian Theory, and his neo- evolution presentations are no more true than Darwin's presentations.

    Evolution is false, and " Forbidden Archeology" the book will convince you of that if you take the time to read it.

    Richard Dawkins lives in fairy land, because he believes life and the existence of everything is an accident, and is self created without a Supreme Intelligence. (that is an ignoramus)
  14. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    09 Dec '10 02:03
    Originally posted by vishvahetu
    He,s riding on the back of the Darwinian Theory, and his neo- evolution presentations are no more true than Darwin's presentations.

    Evolution is false, and " Forbidden Archeology" the book will convince you of that if you take the time to read it.

    Richard Dawkins lives in fairy land, because he believes life and the existence of everything is an accident, and is self created without a Supreme Intelligence. (that is an ignoramus)
    Where will all your 'gods' be when the last human has been driven to extinction? The state of the planet is proof enough for me there is no god watching over humanity like a gardener lovingly tending his plants. If there was a god who started the universe like you think, it was more like a scattering of seeds by a cosmic wind and we are just one more life form that took from all the trillions of planets that didn't and probably trillions where it did and we are no more important on the large screen than any bug on any other planet in our universe.
  15. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    09 Dec '10 02:151 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Where will all your 'gods' be when the last human has been driven to extinction? The state of the planet is proof enough for me there is no god watching over humanity like a gardener lovingly tending his plants. If there was a god who started the universe like you think, it was more like a scattering of seeds by a cosmic wind and we are just one more life f e are no more important on the large screen than any bug on any other planet in our universe.
    shall we look at the state of the planet and lay the blame on God, after all, was it not the application of science and technology which is responsible for the hole in the ozone, lead in petrol, the production of CFCs, excessive use of Nitrogen as in fertilisers, depletion of fishing stocks, deforestation on a massive scale, millions of tons of carbon being spewed into the atmosphere, nuclear weapons and their proliferation, chemical weapons, cluster bombs, is it not true that one in four scientists are actively engaged in weapons programs, which one of these are you now prepared to blame on God?
Back to Top