The God Delusion - Has it persuaded you to be an Atheist?

Originally posted by hippomchippoWhich arguments of his are ''awkward'' and ''ill-informed''?

I have read all of Dawkins books except the last one...
...like a good scientist I test my faith and ontology against such works.

Dawkins trying to deconstruct faith...
...is like you trying to convince me I don't love my partner...
...there is no logical argument that would convince me...
...and there is no logical argument against faith...
...because faith is a different way of knowing...
...faith 'sees' things that are not available to a person without the Spirit.

John 3:3 "Except a man be born again, he cannot see...

Dawkins is trying to deconstruct something that he does not have the required instrument to 'see'...
...he thinks Apologetics are a tool to convince the faithful...
...but the faithful need no convincing...
...and Apologetics are only so the unfaithful may come to 'see'.

Dawkins reminds me of a blind man trying to convince sighted people that sight doesn't exist...
...but it's a futile exercise that might only convince those similarly blind.



*Staff Edit - Trim Those Quotes

[edit on 3/31/10 by niteboy82]

Originally posted by troubleshooterI have read all of Dawkins books except the last one...
...like a good scientist I test my faith and ontology against such works.

Dawkins trying to deconstruct faith...
...is like you trying to convince me I don't love my partner...
...there is no logical argument that would convince me...
...and there is no logical argument against faith...
...because faith is a different way of knowing...
...faith 'sees' things that are not available to a person without the Spirit.

John 3:3 "Except a man be born again, he cannot see...

Dawkins is trying to deconstruct something that he does not have the required instrument to 'see'...
...he thinks Apologetics are a tool to convince the faithful...
...but the faithful need no convincing...
...and Apologetics are only so the unfaithful may come to 'see'.

Dawkins reminds me of a blind man trying to convince sighted people that sight doen't exist...
...it's a futile exercise that might only convince those similarly blind.

[edit on 25/3/10 by troubleshooter]

Well, that's alot of religious dogma, but what arguments do you have against his position? It seems like you're saying that you have no evidence and that faith somehow combats his book.

*Staff Edit - Trim Those Quotes

[edit on 3/31/10 by niteboy82]

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
....In short, 'The God Delusion' is like kryptonite for evangelists.

Thankyou Richard Dawkins!

IRM

[edit on 25/3/10 by InfaRedMan]

So that is a good thing?

If you understood the context of my story, you would indeed understand that I deem this to be a very good thing!

So those Christians are out to "get you?"

Please..................

Did I say that? Stop creating you own subtext. They simply annoy me. I don't need to be saved or brought into the fold. The whole door knocking offensive runs on the presupposition that there are sinners who need to be saved.

The only thing I need to be saved from is evangelists knocking on my door on a Saturday morning, thus ruining one of my very few chances to sleep in after a hard week... only to push some form of archaic superstition onto me.

What if HELL is real...they are the best friends, most loving.....you will ever see.....

And if it's not, they are as annoying as flies. I'll take my chances mate!

and yet you blow them off....wtf?

They blew my beliefs off... WTF!

Your cockiness may lead to your demise....I pray not....ever seen what GRACE means?

Here we go with the old 'Fire & Brimstone' speech. Have you anything but straw men with which to stereotype yourself.

I read your preaching in the third person on other threads OT. OT says this... OT says that.. Well I care not for what OT has to say! Get over it OT!

Oh well, off to another thread

Don't let the door hit you on the way out OT!

IRM

[edit on 26/3/10 by InfaRedMan]

Originally posted by hippomchippo
Well, that's alot of religious dogma, but what arguments do you have against his position? It seems like you're saying that you have no evidence and that faith somehow combats his book.

I am not religious...
...I haven't been in a church building for 30 years (except weddings and funerals).

With quantum mechanics science came to realize that there is no true objective science...
...that fundamentally the observer is involved/influences the experiment...
...faith takes this one step further...
...the person is the instrument doing the observation in the experiment.

So only the individual can 'know' or 'see'...
...there is no possibility of 'objective' evidence...
...although what the individual 'sees' can be compared with what others 'see'...
...the result is the 'community of faith'...
...which is a vast group of individuals who can similarly 'see'.

Dawkins and other rationalists like him thinks that these observations don't exist...
...because their own instrument is not tuned to receive/perceive the experiment...
...so they argue that the object of the experiment doesn't exist...
...and therefore unwilling or unable to test the ontological reality that others share.

The evidence can only be perceived by the individual observer...
...and can only be known epistemologically and communally compared.

Logical argument has nothing to say here...exit Dawkins.



*Staff Edit - Trim Those Quotes

[edit on 3/31/10 by niteboy82]

reply to post by polarwarrior


I was hoping he would delve into a more philosophical approach, as the religious faults are already blindingly obvious to me.

That being said i'm not an atheist, and think it is kind of silly to be one.
Theres nothing wrong with leaving a big question mark in that area and just appreciating the universe as it is.
Although the more you learn about the universe both microscopic and macroscopic you will probably start to learn towards there being some kind of intelligence behind it all.

But certainly not a worldly religious kind of intelligence.

There are plenty of fine arguments against the existence of God. Dawkins' arguments, while persuasively written, are not particularly well constructed philosophically.

He's fun to watch though. Have you have ever seen a video of him debating a creationist? He's a very good rhetorician.

reply to post by troubleshooter


Uh huh.

And what developed quantum theory in the first place?

Math and science.

No, math and science has not killed itself with the research of quantum theory.
If anything is ever going to find god, it is DEFINITELY science.
Kind of ironic.

Well i think many people misunderstand dawkins and atheisim. I do recall him saying that the idea of god is a valid hypothesis, however that there is someone watching your every move and effecting everyone's life is not. I believe in a god but more the prime mover unmoved sense and i do not worship anything.

I read the book and I believed in God before I read it and still do afterwards. His arguments weren't strong enough to change my beliefs. I am not a Christian however and his book did bring up some good points about Christianity that actually fortified my beliefs against organized religion.

With quantum mechanics science came to realize that there is no true objective science...

No, quantum mechanics does not make reality subjective to individual whim. Quantum Mechanics is profoundly strange, yet it is objective and capable of being described by mathematics - as well as provide consistently predictable results when experiments are repeated under controlled conditions by multiple independent observers.

Were quantum mechanics a magic wand capable of turning the objective into the subjective, it wouldn't be possible to build technologies from it with any degree of reliability, or accuracy. However, our society regularly employs several technologies which wouldn't be possible without first understanding these objective and demonstrable properties of QM. For instance, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology relies on an understanding of nuclear magnetic resonance.

So, how does a magnet make a picture of your innards? First, the human body is comprised mostly of fat and water. Water consists of 2 hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. Hydrogen's atomic number is one, which means that it has one proton in its nucleus. Protons posses an attribute known as spin. Each proton has 1/2 "units" of spin. Any element that has a odd atomic number (odd number of protons in its nucleus) posesses a net spin. Elements with an even atomic number have spin units equal in magnitude, but opposite in sign, which cause them to have no net spin. Any element with a net spin is capable of producing an NMR signal.

When the protons are introduced to radio waves of a critical frequency (42.58 MHz) they flip to their high energy state, shown in the figure as an increase in magnitude along the -z axis. When the proton returns to its original state, energy is dissipated, and the spin is restored to the + z axis. The amount of time required for protons to realign themselves with the magnetic field is known as T1. An MRI is equipped with a receiver to measure the energy dissipation of a T1 process. The length of T1 can be influenced by different chemical environments, ie. tissue abberations, such as tumors, broken bones, etc. These differences will show up on the final image.

MRI 4 Dumiez. (Brief layman's overview of the basic principals)

Which we can then use a variant (fMRI) of to record patterns of activity based on the flow of blood to the various regions in real time. Those patterns of activity can then be assigned tonal values and played back audibly and compared to the music other brains produce. Diagnosing conditions such as schizophrenia (which produces it's own discordant symphony) become far easier with these audio cues.



So, ironically, the objective and predictable properties of Quantum Mechanics can be used to "Peer into the Consciousness" of the proposed "Observer" and tell whether or not their desire for a subjective reality is merely just wishful thinking & misunderstanding... or a disorder of their brain not being able to properly tell the difference between fantasy and reality.

The Supreme Being is very real. Personal experience, in the flesh, is possible today. Faith is the foundation, but even that is facilitated by the Supreme Being. Real, honest, in person experience does exists in the world today. The current from the highest region touches down on the earth first. That is the real truth behind the idea of the earth being the center of the universe. The earth is the most important place in the entire creations of matter. Didn't read this book. Lots of cleaver arguments and philosophy can be manufactured for anything. Social Religion is not true religion and has no real relationship with real spirituality and spiritual opportunity. It's easy to come up with arguments tied to the fictional religions. It is also good to have the air cleared on such an important subject. Such books can help people to escape the brainwashing but they can also be used to lead them into other brainwashing. But, never the less, what a fools errand to claim proof that results in a pointless, empty existence. Are such thinkers believing in their "evolution" being the god that will manufacture a better world? There are beings, in this world, that come from the highest region and live ordinary lives. They have no involvement with the salvation of souls, they are here to keep the creation stable and prevent it's dissipation into nothingness. At the core of "matter" is pure spirit, if not, the creation would have nothing whatsoever to hold it together. That pure spirit is under the direct control of the Supreme Being.

reply to post by Lebowski achiever


Believe it or not but it was my faith that made me lose faith. I lost my faith when I started to actually look at my beliefs and at what was in the Bible. I realized that God, if he was real, wouldn't want me to believe something without questioning it, after all if you don't question it how do you know its true?

So it was the teachings and the book itself that did it. Atheists don't need to do anything, religious arguments eventually defeat themselves.

Originally posted by Senz20
Im the Major General of the Allied Atheist Allegiance. I dont think i need a book to tell me the dude isnt real.

I mean like if all those greek gods "are just not real", what makes Christian god or Allah, etc real?

How do they know its Jupiter and Zeus who is real and god and Allah is just pure mythology?

I am sorry if I offend you but I have to ask. You escape religious tyranny and choose to live a life without believing in god. In your escape you obviously found a group of like minded people and joined the (AAA) which I thought was just a South Park spoof (if you are being satirical then great job). You have obviously gone high in the ranks by spreading the "truth" as you see it. What makes you any different than a church missionary? How much is your tithe? If you are seriously in that organization then you have no need in denying religion because you are proof that we as humans are hard wired to believe in it. Do you see what I am getting at?

Gods, hells, heavens alike,
all of them are real.
Scaringly enough real,
when you take a look around:
In their name destruction,
hatred and indiscrimination
leads the way. But gods,
they are not to be blamed.
it is their creator, the man,
alone who shoud be ashamed.

-v

Have been an atheist most of my life and found my "Bible" in Richard Dawkins book back in december 2008. Without that "Joy" of total emptyness that he spreads with his hollow words I would have never found my way home to the truth inside.

Here's a good one for you: What are the last words of an atheist?

"Damn, wrong turn ..."

Sins forgiven. Grace given. Play the game and let's start dancing on the ceiling.

Namaste,

Deckard

To answer your question, no, I've never had doubt.

Sometimes I get 'down' when I read some of the (supposed) 'proof' writen by the 'Anti-God' crowd.

Sure I do.

I've got faith - but is it shakable?

Sure it is, I'm human, full of life's miseries (and joys) and hormones (good days and bad days) etc.

So, sure there are times when I 'wonder' - when I get 'down'.

BUT!

I'm never alone in my moments when I feel 'off' - Thank God those are the moments when Christ carries me.

peace

Thanks for all your replies. I have to read through them all again later. In answer to someone's question "What's with all this in between stuff. You either believe in god or you don't". I will answer it:

I don't believe in Religion. It is totally man made, as some of you have rightly pointed out, to control and to line the pockets. I don't believe in a caring god. If he exists, he really doesn't care about the suffering that is going on (especially the suffering of children outrages me) or if you get that job or not. He certainly does not have voicemail where you can leave a message to tell him what you want.

But when I look at nature and how little we understand about what goes on, I do believe in a higher power but that could just be because I just don't understand it, and we humans need to always find reasons WHY things are the way we are.

I always think: We know the laws of physics....but who wrote those laws? The mind boggles when I think that..

reply to post by Lebowski achiever


There's a page on Dawkins website called 'converts corner'. It's, well as you would expect, messages from converts after reading his books. Although they're not ATS members I think it's what you're looking for.

richarddawkins.net...

Believe it or not but it was my faith that made me lose faith. I lost my faith when I started to actually look at my beliefs and at what was in the Bible

Here's a good quote from Penn Jillette about that.

"Whatever you do don't read the bible for a moral code. It advocates predudice, cruelty, superstition and murder. Read it because we need more atheists, and nothing will get you there faster than reading the damn bible."

The God Delusion for me was quite an eye opener, it just made it clearer to me why I don't believe in God. I never really knew much about the bible stories and other religious texts he refers to in the book. I'm glad I read it and i would reccomend it to anyone religious and non religious, it's a good book first and foremost

Originally posted by ReelView
The Supreme Being is very real. Personal experience, in the flesh, is possible today. Faith is the foundation, but even that is facilitated by the Supreme Being. Real, honest, in person experience does exists in the world today. The current from the highest region touches down on the earth first. That is the real truth behind the idea of the earth being the center of the universe. The earth is the most important place in the entire creations of matter. Didn't read this book. Lots of cleaver arguments and philosophy can be manufactured for anything. Social Religion is not true religion and has no real relationship with real spirituality and spiritual opportunity. It's easy to come up with arguments tied to the fictional religions. It is also good to have the air cleared on such an important subject. Such books can help people to escape the brainwashing but they can also be used to lead them into other brainwashing. But, never the less, what a fools errand to claim proof that results in a pointless, empty existence. Are such thinkers believing in their "evolution" being the god that will manufacture a better world? There are beings, in this world, that come from the highest region and live ordinary lives. They have no involvement with the salvation of souls, they are here to keep the creation stable and prevent it's dissipation into nothingness. At the core of "matter" is pure spirit, if not, the creation would have nothing whatsoever to hold it together. That pure spirit is under the direct control of the Supreme Being.

People who believe in evolution don't think it's some sort of god that will manufacture a better world, but an accurate description of how life evolved on this planet.