Thread: Richard Dawkins is God

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

Unfortunately I fear that anyone who fears God wouldn't dare to pick it up as surely it must be the work of Satan, not to mention the statistical fact that anyone intelligent enough to get through the book is unlikely to be religious anyway - thus lies the paradox.

My, my - aren't we arrogant & conceited?

Dawkins is a fool of the first order. Not all arrogant rhetoric is the truth.

Originally Posted by watterinja

My, my - aren't we arrogant & conceited?

That's our Scamp!

Originally Posted by watterinja

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

Unfortunately I fear that anyone who fears God wouldn't dare to pick it up as surely it must be the work of Satan, not to mention the statistical fact that anyone intelligent enough to get through the book is unlikely to be religious anyway - thus lies the paradox.

My, my - aren't we arrogant & conceited?

Dawkins is a fool of the first order. Not all arrogant rhetoric is the truth.

So he's wrong is he? ..There really is a God and he made eve from Adam's rib and he made the universe in seven days and his son was the baby Jesus meek and mild who we should be eternally grateful for because he died on a cross - that what you're saying?

You must be thick as pigshit, if not thicker!

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

You must be thick as pigshit, if not thicker!

Easy there, Scamp.
Why don't you expand on your paradigm that septics won't elect an atheist?

Let's get this right; are you saying it's better to have a black HIV, autistic gay schizo Hispanic woman President with a wooden leg and crabs, than one who doesn't believe Jesus was born of Holy wedlock?

Originally Posted by keda

Let's get this right; are you saying it's better to have a black HIV, autistic gay schizo Hispanic woman President with a wooden leg and crabs, than one who doesn't believe Jesus was born of Holy wedlock?

That seems to be the premise of Scamp's book...

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

anyone intelligent enough to get through the book is unlikely to be religious anyway

Agreed.

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

anyone intelligent enough to get through the book is unlikely to be religious anyway - thus lies the paradox.

I always felt that the three most arrogant, intolerant and toxic religions of modern times are 1.) evangelical Christianity 2.) Islam and 3.) Atheism. Posts like yours demonstrate this point. Most of the West's greatest thinkers from the Golden Age and Age of Enlightenment believed in a higher intelligence. So do almost all modern Asians, because it's intuitive. You might be shocked that I actually understood one of Dawkin's recent talks that I saw on youtube.com. He spent 45 minutes doing his own 'straw man ' routine, poking holes at the literal interpretations of the Bible. Sophomoric stuff. Atheists can be as close-minded and defensive as the most ardent Jihadi or Christian Bushbot.

^ Excellent post. The old 'straw man' trick indeed.

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Originally Posted by The Gentleman Scamp

anyone intelligent enough to get through the book is unlikely to be religious anyway - thus lies the paradox.

I always felt that the three most arrogant, intolerant and toxic religions of modern times are 1.) evangelical Christianity 2.) Islam and 3.) Atheism. Posts like yours demonstrate this point. Most of the West's greatest thinkers from the Golden Age and Age of Enlightenment believed in a higher intelligence. So do almost all modern Asians, because it's intuitive. You might be shocked that I actually understood one of Dawkin's recent talks that I saw on youtube.com. He spent 45 minutes doing his own 'straw man ' routine, poking holes at the literal interpretations of the Bible. Sophomoric stuff. Atheists can be as close-minded and defensive as the most ardent Jihadi or Christian Bushbot.

Well I'm inclined to agree with you there, but I never said I was an athiest, neither am I am agnostic, I simply don't know.

I would totally agree that somebody who says "there's absolutely nothing when you die" is just as arrogant as somebody who is adamant that there is, and personally I like to hope that there is a 'next level' whereby everything we ever wanted to know will be explained, though it is so far from our comprehension it is a waste of time to live your life trying to figure out what it is.

There was a post a few weeks back when somebody said that the foetus has all the answers but the trauma of childbirth causes it to lapse into complete ignorance so we have to start from scratch.

This ties in perfectly with an NDE a Canadian woman I know on Samui had 3 years ago when she had a car accident at 22yrs old.

So I live in hope but I don't gamble my life on the premise of a god as such.

An interesting thing about religion is that every race and culture that I know of in human history had a sort of religious belief, be it animistic, monotheistic or whatever. Ditto spirits and ghosts.
Whether this is anecdotal evidence of the existence of some form of supernatural presence, or the manifestation of a psychological need within ourself to explain or rationalise the incomprehensible (creation, existence, life & death etc) is a ponderous thought.

I just want to point out that atheism isn't a religion, since there is no god to worship.
In its simplest form it is just a non-belief.

"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
-- Don Hirschberg

Originally Posted by sabang

An interesting thing about religion is that every race and culture that I know of in human history had a sort of religious belief, be it animistic, monotheistic or whatever. Ditto spirits and ghosts.
Whether this is anecdotal evidence of the existence of some form of supernatural presence, or the manifestation of a psychological need within ourself to explain or rationalise the incomprehensible (creation, existence, life & death etc) is a ponderous thought.

Perhaps it just comes down to greed and the fact that Earth is not enough for us. We have to rape and pillage it and we have to know everything which we don't, so we make it up.

Originally Posted by stroller

I just want to point out that atheism isn't a religion, since there is no god to worship.In its simplest form it is just a non-belief.
"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."Don Hirschberg

Religion can be thought of as set of beliefs concerning the nature and purpose of the universe, usually involving some moral element and superhuman force. Buddhism has no god to worship. I must admit that I stretched the definition for rhetorical purposes. In my defense, many hard-core Darwinists and atheists do exhibit aspects of religion. Their all-encompassing explanation of the universe seems to give them a sense of certainty and purpose. Many also favor eugenics (hence the moral element of their mindset). Atheists, as with religious fanatics, can be very defensive people who go off on you if you question them, although I thought Gentleman Scamp clarified his position in a very thoughtful manner.

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Most of the West's greatest thinkers from the Golden Age and Age of Enlightenment believed in a higher intelligence. So do almost all modern Asians, because it's intuitive.

Actually, this not right. [ex Indonesia] Most Asians do not believe in a higher being.

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Originally Posted by stroller

I just want to point out that atheism isn't a religion, since there is no god to worship.In its simplest form it is just a non-belief.
"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."Don Hirschberg

Religion can be thought of as set of beliefs concerning the nature and purpose of the universe, usually involving some moral element and superhuman force. Buddhism has no god to worship. I must admit that I stretched the definition for rhetorical purposes. In my defense, many hard-core Darwinists and atheists do exhibit aspects of religion. Their all-encompassing explanation of the universe seems to give them a sense of certainty and purpose. Many also favor eugenics (hence the moral element of their mindset). Atheists, as with religious fanatics, can be very defensive people who go off on you if you question them, although I thought Gentleman Scamp clarified his position in a very thoughtful manner.

In order to be "moral" one needs to believe in something superhuman force?

For the record, while I believe in mankind, I'm a complete atheists. But please feel free to question me

Originally Posted by stroller

I just want to point out that atheism isn't a religion, since there is no god to worship.
In its simplest form it is just a non-belief.

I would say that there is a difference between a) not believing that there is a God and b) believing that there isn't a God? The latter does strike me as a viewpoint that could be called a belief system - a religion if you like.

Originally Posted by sabang

An interesting thing about religion is that every race and culture that I know of in human history had a sort of religious belief, be it animistic, monotheistic or whatever. Ditto spirits and ghosts.
Whether this is anecdotal evidence of the existence of some form of supernatural presence, or the manifestation of a psychological need within ourself to explain or rationalise the incomprehensible (creation, existence, life & death etc) is a ponderous thought.

This could well be the case - nothing more than a by-product of consciousness and awareness of 'self'....Or it could all be true - I'm hedging my bets.

believing that there isn't a God? The latter does strike me as a viewpoint that could be called a belief system - a religion if you like.

If somebody said to me - 'There's nothing after you die, fact' I would think that just as arrogant as somebody who was adamant there was a God and stated it as if it were fact.

If somebody said to my children 'If you do something bad God will send you to hell where you will burn and scream forever' - then I would consider it child abuse and take whatever action I could against the cnut, be it a court case or a hammer and a bottle of kettle descaler.

Originally Posted by William

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Most of the West's greatest thinkers from the Golden Age and Age of Enlightenment believed in a higher intelligence. So do almost all modern Asians, because it's intuitive.

Actually, this not right. [ex Indonesia] Most Asians do not believe in a higher being.

That's logical, can't be anything higher than Asians.

Thanks Gentleman Scamp, I very well may order this book.