RE: No rational case for God = increasingly desperate attacks on atheists
July 10, 2014 at 10:10 am
(July 10, 2014 at 9:58 am)Jenny A Wrote: I just finished The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, by Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, 2007. I included the copyright date, because the McGraths make essentially all of the same arguments.
1. Dawkins doesn't understand the nounced view of most Christians. Therefore Dawkin's book is really an attack on a strawman.
2. Since he hasn't taken the time to read theology, he has no business talking with any authority about whether god exists or not.
3. Some scientists believe in god (including himself--he's a neurophysiology who went on to study theology), therefore, belief in god is rational.
4. Science is not really at odds with religion, because religion and science answer such very different questions.
5. Dawkins fails to see that religion and god are not the same thing. God exists, but religions change.
6. Dawkins has failed to account for religion. Yet religion exists. Therefore god exists. ----In other words you have a god sized hole in your head.
7. If religion is evil, so is atheism, just look at the former Soviet.
8. Jesus was very moral.
9. Properly followed, religion is very good for you.
10. Religion is making a comeback.
And the finale? Atheism is a faith.
He tells this little anecdote in the first chapter:
Quote:After [a lecture]. I was confronted by a very angry young man. The lecture had not been particularly remarkable. I had simply demonstrated, by rigorous use of scientific, historical and philosophical arguments, that Dawkins's intellectual case against God didn't stand up to critical examination. But this man was angry--in fact, I would say he was furious. Why? Because, he told me, I had "destroyed his faith." His atheism rested on the authority of Richard Dawkins, and I had totally undermined his faith. He would have to go away and rethink everything. How dare I do such a thing!(Italics in the original)
I'm not sure I believe in this angry young man.
Atheism is a faith. As much as there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of deities, there is none to prove the non-existence of a deities either. Taking up a position of either asserting they exist or asserting they do not exist requires a leap of faith.
As much as theists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with their god, atheists should not fill vacuums in knowledge with the lack of a god, both are factually unsubstantiated positions unless they are prepared to accept theism and atheism are both positions of faith.
The most anyone can say factually is, we do not know.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
