Richard Dawkins sums up religion
- Thread starter Merlin5
- Start date
yup, he is an irritating SOB.
I don't see how people can be inferred to as sub thinkers many great minds believe in god because it's easier than to pursue that question whilst dealing with all the others. I was surprised just how many nuclear scientists at a place I used to work at were Christian. It seemed odd but some of them just are. It hasn't stopped them being great mathematicians or physicists.
I'm all for believing in what you want to I do agree that at this day and age people should be able to leave the belief structure alone but if people still find comfort in it and it helps them cope with their lives so be it. Christians and non Christians can all still have rubbish or good lives.
I've gotten through some dark times alone in this world and others have used god doesn't make our experience and development any less real. Some of the things the church does for people is a worthy cause and often they ask for nothing in return something i rarely see Richard Dawkins do in his crusade of self importance.
Stopped reading after page 2 have a nice discussion chaps all be it a massively pointless one.
Last edited:
I have never said I think that Genesis is to be taken literally.
We may have DNA that is shared with many other animals etc. I still 'Believe' that we were all made in the image of God. Notice the word believe. I am not looking for proof, or evidence. It's about faith. Ask millions of Christians and they will tell you the same thing.
My belief is that God created everything. Be it he may have started it all and let nature do the rest. Except for us as we are made in his image. If you were a Christian etc you would understand my belief. It is hard for you to take it in as you are a non believer. You need scientific proof of God. Look around you I say.
I can understand how you look at the way a Christian thinks and believes but it's not hard when you have such a strong faith.
Others can ridicule me on here for my beliefs and that doesn't bother me. For me, God is very much real.
Do you men literally in his Image..as in God is a Human Being in appearance?
Because that is not how mainstream Christian Theology interprets such, it is about the spiritual nature of Mankind, not his physical nature. And it is this spiritual nature which Scripture teaches is unique to mankind...not that mankind was literally made in the image of God. Like the infusion of Jesus with the Holy Spirit at his baptism...it is a spiritual event. We could have evolved just as all the physical evidence suggests and still have been borne out of Gods Image.
Do you see why it is not necessary to oppose Evolution, it doesn't impact on the 'universal truth' conveyed through Scripture if you believe in that scripture.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7,634
- Location
- Ireland/Northern Ireland Border
Why do you think I'm having a laugh, what's incoherent about what I'm asking, and what have my parents go to do with anything?
If you truly have free will and can choose to change your mind any time you like, give it a try and stop believing in God for a little while. Or admit that you can't, and that you don't actually have the free will you think you do.
and so should the church.
So you don't make massive a priori assumption then when testing science - how interesting
So one 'believe' in a god but 'trusts' science. How interesting. No bias there ... no prejudice whatsoever ... and no ability to compare like with like.
I can see how you admire the likes of Dawkins though because rather than address the points I made or say oh you're right I got faith and belief the wrong way around because I blatantly haven't got a clue what I am on about you just summed it up as philosophical claptrap. /golfclap
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,259
You can do your own research on that one.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 1,675
- Location
- Oxford
I think you are misunderstanding trust in science. No one scientist can study everything as the field is too wide, but if we wished we could repeat previous studies to confirm the science that we are basing our current theories on. The only trust is that we assume previous scientists have been honest and careful when performing the work. Certainly there will be some human error here.
This seem very different to belief in god, which in my opinion has no evidence to support it in the physical universe. Thus, people are choosing to believe in god based on faith alone. This is fine, but the comparison to faith in science is not.
Happy to be correct on this and hear you ideas?
This seem very different to belief in god, which in my opinion has no evidence to support it in the physical universe. Thus, people are choosing to believe in god based on faith alone. This is fine, but the comparison to faith in science is not.
Happy to be correct on this and hear you ideas?
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 1,675
- Location
- Oxford
No I can't as I see no reason to waste my time, but am interested if you wish to tell me. It would make for a better discussion if you defend your side of the argument.
Last edited:
Well, I'm an agnostic and an atheist, although I do admire Richard Dawkins, he is an incredibly intelligent man, he at times overstretches himself.
I don't think you can make a sweeping statement and say all theists are stupid, that is obviously not the case. That said, I do wonder if someone like Newton would hold the same religious belief if he were alive today.
I don't think you can make a sweeping statement and say all theists are stupid, that is obviously not the case. That said, I do wonder if someone like Newton would hold the same religious belief if he were alive today.
He didn't actually say that re: all theists - watch from here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW4Y2fEVFrQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=71
he's talking about people who say actually believe water was turned into wine etc...
I couldn't argue with that.
"Teach your children how to think, not what to think" I think most of the issues go away if we all do that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Eh?
Is that one of those funny quote things? As that isn't Benedict, or is that the point?
'Like use the force harry', gandalf.
While talking about charity, not living in the pimped out pope suite at the Vatican etc.. sets a nice example etc.. they're more or less just token measure in comparison to what he is in the position to do - the greatest thing he could do for the world is to simply change the Church's stance on contraception and advocate the use of condoms.
You mean like the survey he had begun asking Catholics exactly what their views are on such things as Contraception, Gay Sex and Abortion? He is trying to gauge just how such teachings in the Church relate to the modern world and the Churches Congregation and whether they are still practical or in-keeping with the message of Christ in a modern world.
He has publicly stated that the Churches obsession with contraception, abortion and gay marriage is morally questionable and that neither he nor the Catholic Church is there to judge (on homosexuality). He has recently set up a Child Sex Abuse Committee to actively fight child sex abuse within the church and help victims of it, he also (as did Benedict) order all Bishops and Cardinals to report allegations of Child Abuse to the relevant local legal authorities in the countries in which it occurs as well as changing Church Law by broadening and strengthening the range of crimes relating to Children...another measure to ensure Priests and laymen cannot hide behind Church Law which has happened in the past and created problems for Bishops in dealing with such allegations. Not to mention the examination and subsequent reorganisation of The Curia (beginning with Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments.which is responsible for Liturgy)...with what is expected to be a completely new draft of The Apostolic Constitution.
This is a fundamental shift in Papal attitudes and while change on such fundamental issues will take time, it has begun.
Last edited:
You posted assumptions and opinions based on the information.
That can be construed as common components and not common ancestry.
God's days are probably much longer than our know 24 hour day cycle.
For the last time you are being rather with this, again, why would anyone stop believing just because another asks them to?, how about you stop believing what you believe?, see the how foolish this is now?.
Absolutely yes.
The evidence is everything in our known universe. Evolutionists/Atheists believe in many things that they can not see and so you need some sort of faith based belief system in order to believe that an ape-like creature evolved into a human being, no one has ever observed this.
