How Richard Dawkins Lost His Battle with God (prophets, agnostics, abortion)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Geez every forum on the internet is full of sides yelling at eachother and wishing the other side would shut up and go away. This means liberals versus conservatives, left versus right, AGW versus skeptics, truthers versus reasonable people and many more dichotomies of beliefs.
My only wish is that the atheists would stay out of the Christianity forum and limit their appearances to the Religion & Spirituality form, which seems to me to be the place for the kind of debate most atheists want to have.
I would agree with this IF Christians didn't retreat into the "Christianity" forum to sit around talking smack about atheists and back-patting each other while we're powerless to defend ourselves and our position.
Of course, that also means no Christians in the A&A forum.
d by it. My impulse is more to protect the weak, but what the heck to do I know, and who's asking?
All that said, when speaking to fact rather than opinion, I'll take Dawkins over most other comers any day -- particularly Chopra. I can separate Dawkin's arguments from his personality.
Absolutely spot-on post.
I look at the message rather than the messenger MOST of the time (though sources are important when dealing with actual research and the presentation of evidence). Dawkins' points about religion are not invalidated even if he were a full-blown rapist.
I've always despised the idea of character assassination as a means of winning an argument because it doesn't say anything at all about your position. It doesn't say anything about the opponent's position. It's just random character assassination - a smear campaign.
It's sort of the inverse fallacy of Appeal to Authority - only this time, you try to discredit the source based on non-relevant information.
"Nah, don't go to him, he's a horrible doctor. After all, he cheats at Scrabble!"
So the thread title seems to have fallen flat. Dawkins has not lost his battle with God (or the god -claim, at least) in either personal or general terms.
I haven't always agreed with his line, manner or argument and as I have said, here before, he doesn't even seem to understand what atheism is. That isn't a relevant point. Atheism does not rely of authority figures or atheist saints to make its case. Snarling at Dawkins, Hitchens or O'Hair is beside the point. Each of them made points for the atheist case and those points should be considered on their merits, not on the basis of how much media exposure they had or what nice guys they are.
Hitchens was a public coming out figure. Dawkins has been as influential as Sagan. The atheist argument has had to reconsider this or that point, but I am totally convinced that its case is sound and becomes more rock -solid the more it is tested, and the case for God is not.
I don't know what is the idea behind thread titles like this one. It turns out to be without any substance or validity. It just sounds like shouting slogans in the hope that, if you shout it loud it makes it true.
^^^
Absolutely right.
The point of the thread, or rather the point of the article cited in the thread, is that Deepak Chopra has a new book out that he's trying to flog, which is self confessed jab at Dawkins book The God Delusion.
"It's the anti-God Delusion book I feel must be presented so that people don't fall into a kind of passive unbelief for want of a better way"
I like his footnote at the bottom of the article that he wrote himself:
"Deepak Chopra, MD is the author of more than 80 books with twenty-two New York Times bestsellers."
Nothing like a bit of patting-yourself-on-the-back right?
An embarrassment for who? Surely you're not speaking for atheists, right? Because I never voted for you to be my spokesman.
Well, now don't take it personally, Shirina. I wasn't referring to anyone in particular except Dawkins and Krauss, who at times are just as pushy and obnoxious about their atheism as the Christian fundamentalists are about theirs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
No, actually, we can't just become deists - because we don't believe in this higher power you're referring to, whether it intervenes or not. Sure, I get what you're saying, but I can't just up and start believing in an impersonal god just because.
If you can look out at the cosmos and not see the wonder of how precise it all works---like clockwork, then okay; deism is not for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
I agree that it's more reasonable than theism, sure. But believing in a god is neither reasonable or logical to an atheist.
It's that word, "God" that catches in people's throats. Sometimes phrases like "Higher Power" or similar--something that defines an entity of superhuman power that could cause all this to come into existence---often works better.
By the way, not meaning to make it sound like I'm "hitting" on you, but you're a beautiful girl---too young and pretty to allow this affliction---fibromyalgia, I would guess---to mess up your life. Isn't there anything to be done to relieve the pain, or at least manage it so that you can have some semblance of a normal life?
Looks like I'm going to have to take the time to learn how to split quoted posts so that Shrina doesn't make fun of me again.
She made me cry...........
LOL
^^^
Absolutely right.
The point of the thread, or rather the point of the article cited in the thread, is that Deepak Chopra has a new book out that he's trying to flog, which is self confessed jab at Dawkins book The God Delusion.
"It's the anti-God Delusion book I feel must be presented so that people don't fall into a kind of passive unbelief for want of a better way"
I like his footnote at the bottom of the article that he wrote himself:
"Deepak Chopra, MD is the author of more than 80 books with twenty-two New York Times bestsellers."
Nothing like a bit of patting-yourself-on-the-back right?
I'm reminded of Spike Milligan's quip "...he has written more than 200 songs..all of them crap...."
I have prayed and declared over the lives of some of the biggest known Atheist in modern times and Richard was one of them. Mark my words, he WILL be a living testimony to the saving power of Christ and it will be a glorious day for God.
I have prayed and declared over the lives of some of the biggest known Atheist in modern times and Richard was one of them. Mark my words, he WILL be a living testimony to the saving power of Christ and it will be a glorious day for God.
If he converts it will certainly be a remarkable time. What successful converts of prominent atheists to Christians have you had so far? (n.b Flew doesn't count - he was convinced by ID, but not so far as becoming a Christian).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and many more dichotomies of beliefs.
I'm reminded of Spike Milligan's quip "...he has written more than 200 songs..all of them crap...."
