Richard Dawkins and the God of the Old Testament

[Exian]

The difference is that we have millions of people who form their entire lives around the morality of the OT god, and not a single person forms their morality around natural selection (well, maybe I shouldn't say "not a single person").

This question was whittled down to "a dog-eat-dog world" and posed to Dawkins by some lady in a video floating around youtube somewhere. To which he replied with something like (in my own words)- No one is proposing that we live by the standards of natural selection. A dog eat dog world would, of course, be horrendous. And it probably wouldn't work in the first place, as a single species, evidenced by us not naturally living this way. Heck, maybe a small pocket of humans tried it, but if they did, it didn't work, and we no longer see them. We are civilized and aware; if anything this places a responsibility on us to look after the world and it's inhabitants.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Wiker's point is that natural selection is no less callously indifferent to the sufferings of the weak than is the "God of the OT" as He is commonly misrepresented by atheists.

So, after dismissing the existence of God, you're actually no better off than you were before.

Morality is relative and subjective, and your own morality is included in that statement.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Because atheism is a worldview.

No, you're wrong.

[abaris]

Because atheism is a worldview.

So, your watch and learn attitude was just for nothing. Atheism is at the backburner of my mind, as has been repeatedly said. My worldview is connected to entirely different things and experiences. It wouldn't change if I somehow believed in a god. Atheism, well, it's just that I don't believe in a god and don't go to church. Other than that, it's nothing.

But what good is me repeating what I have already said quite often. You still won't get it. Or have you become a republican because of god?

[Cyberman]

You know when atheism is furthest from my life?

When I'm not posting here.

[Homeless Nutter]

Because atheism is a worldview.

Yo' mama is a worldview...

[LastPoet]

Randy is getting desperate. Poor guy, needing us to validate his delusion...

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Atheism is NOT a worldview or anything like that, it doesn't dictate morality or almost anything we do in our daily lives. Why is it so hard to understand?

Because atheism is a worldview.

Folks, I've posted repeatedly on why interacting with Randy is futile, and the above demonstrates why.

I repeat, randy is not here for dialogue or discussion. He is not here to listen to learn, or to interact.

[LastPoet]

Folks, I've posted repeatedly on why interacting with Randy is futile, and the above demonstrates why.

I repeat, randy is not here for dialogue or discussion. He is not here to listen to learn, or to interact.

You only say that, because the AF staff is here to persecute christians from copypasta their favored apologists, without thought, without piece of mind...

I say this without critique Good.

(replace christian with any other denomination that strives to muddy waters, instead of PROVIDING THE FUCKING EVIDENCE)

[Crossless2.0]

Because atheism is a worldview.

Folks, I've posted repeatedly on why interacting with Randy is futile, and the above demonstrates why.

I repeat, randy is not here for dialogue or discussion. He is not here to listen to learn, or to interact.

Oh, I don't know about that. I have great faith that if we just repeat something (e.g., atheism is not a worldview) for Randy's benefit a million fucking times, it might sink in.  Otherwise, I'd have no alternative but to dismiss him as a willfully disingenuous troll. And that can't be! No one would put this much effort into hiding behind other people's strawman arguments if they weren't really, really serious.

Just ask him.