Searching for GOD...

[Leonard James]

Hmmm!

I'd be more impressed if he didn't "wipe the floor" with other people.

Not exactly respectful behaviour is it?

Manners maketh man!

As far as I have seen RD is always polite. He simply successfully rebuts all "God" arguments. I have never seen him answer anybody rudely.

[Nearly Sane]

So, with apologies to Walter Savage Landor, never mind your imaginary conversation with Prof. Dawkins (who would of course in person wipe the floor with you, wring you out in the kitchen sink, rinse you through and peg you out on the line to dry); you could, in principle, convince any and all of us here simply by making a cogent and coherent case for your beliefs.

You've not done so thus far, and we both know why.

One of the problems with forum postings is that it is not practical to expand on some ideas and topics as much as I would like to.

One of my atheist freinds bought me a copy of "The God Delusion" in an attempt to convert me.  After reading it I had many long discussions with my friend in which I brought up many points on which he failed to offer any real answer.  I have touched on some of these points in my postings here which have not been answered.  The link below is an interesting critique of Dawkin's book by Terry Eagleton which highlights some further shortcomings:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n20/terry-eagleton/lunging-flailing-mispunching

Alan,


I note that you make the statement that you have had made posting a here that have not had any answers. I would suggest they may not have had answers that you found satisfactory but that they have all received some form of answer, unless a couple ed of been missed but since you admit to not seeing all replies I can't see how you can make the claim. You are in phrasing your statement both making it stronger and more a fact based claim than it can really be from a subjective viewpoint you have and I would suggest that approach is not unusual for you.

Further in relation to Shaker' s point about talking with Dawkins, you cut out and ignored what was the central issue. Dawkins is fairly used to speaking in such circumstances and might well be assumed more likely to come off better because of that practice. For similar reasons, William Lane Craig would easily take on a tag team of atheists from here. It's a practised skill and relates very little to truth.

[Leonard James]

One of my atheist freinds bought me a copy of "The God Delusion" in an attempt to convert me.  After reading it I had many long discussions with my friend in which I brought up many points on which he failed to offer any real answer.

Your problem, Alan, is that you have subjugated your ability to reason to your "God" belief, and as a consequence you are unable to accept Dawson's perfectly reasoned arguments.

[Leonard James]

Further in relation to Shaker' s point about talking with Dawkins, you cut out and ignored what was the central issue. Dawkins is fairly used to speaking in such circumstances and might well be assumed more likely to come off better because of that practice. For similar reasons, William Lane Craig would easily take on a tag team of atheists from here. It's a practised skill and relates very little to truth.

An excellent point.

[Alan Burns]

I note that you make the statement that you have had made posting a here that have not had any answers. I would suggest they may not have had answers that you found satisfactory but that they have all received some form of answer, unless a couple ed of been missed but since you admit to not seeing all replies I can't see how you can make the claim. You are in phrasing your statement both making it stronger and more a fact based claim than it can really be from a subjective viewpoint you have and I would suggest that approach is not unusual for you.

Further in relation to Shaker' s point about talking with Dawkins, you cut out and ignored what was the central issue. Dawkins is fairly used to speaking in such circumstances and might well be assumed more likely to come off better because of that practice. For similar reasons, William Lane Craig would easily take on a tag team of atheists from here. It's a practised skill and relates very little to truth.

Yes, I should have qualified this by stating that I have not received satisfactory answers, for example, "we don't know yet"

[Leonard James]

Yes, I should have qualified this by stating that I have not received satisfactory answers, for example, "we don't know yet"

An honest answer is worth more than a story invented by people in a bygone age.

[jjohnjil]

One of my atheist freinds bought me a copy of "The God Delusion" in an attempt to convert me.  After reading it I had many long discussions with my friend in which I brought up many points on which he failed to offer any real answer.

Your problem, Alan, is that you have subjugated your ability to reason to your "God" belief, and as a consequence you are unable to accept Dawson's perfectly reasoned arguments.

I think when we discuss Christianity with people like Alan and Sassy we should see them as being in a similar position to a hostage who has a gun pointing at his head.  He/she answers questions with a high degree of 'What if I upset the guy with the gun!"

It's so much easier for us to say what's on our mind than it is for them. The Bible has many instances of warnings of the consequences of doubting it's truth and so the religious have it in mind that anyone arguing against God's word must be one of Satan's gang!

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

[Nearly Sane]

Yes, I should have qualified this by stating that I have not received satisfactory answers, for example, "we don't know yet"

And surely at base there is as sweet a description of differing ministers involved as you need. You find the answer 'Don' t know' unsatisfying, I find it the only answer I can trust.

[Leonard James]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

[Rhiannon]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

Noooooooooooo!

[Leonard James]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

Noooooooooooo!

 

[Gonnagle]

Dearie me,

Dawkins, God Delusion, it is one long Floo post, bad God, very bad God.

Hell his fellow Oxford atheists distanced themselves from the book.

Gonnagle.

[Alan Burns]

I think when we discuss Christianity with people like Alan and Sassy we should see them as being in a similar position to a hostage who has a gun pointing at his head.  He/she answers questions with a high degree of 'What if I upset the guy with the gun!"

It's so much easier for us to say what's on our mind than it is for them. The Bible has many instances of warnings of the consequences of doubting it's truth and so the religious have it in mind that anyone arguing against God's word must be one of Satan's gang!

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

I can assure you that at no time have I ever felt that God was restricting my thoughts by not allowing me to doubt.  I know that I am free to explore whatever doubts come into my head with nothing to fear, but I also know that I can't force myself to doubt something I know must exist.

[Alan Burns]

People use him (RD) to beat other people over the head, about their beliefs. Hardly surprising that he isn't much liked in some circles.

Alan believes what he believes.

Evidence is only as good as how it is interpreted and people interpret things differently.

Much of religious evidence is based on human experience, which is difficult.

Trying to prove God outside human experience is extremely difficult because you can either see us being here as proof or not.

It comes down to how you interpret what we all know.

Science doesn't really come down on either side, it just measures and observes and tries to draw conclusions from that, with out the human experience thingy 😉

A very thoughtful post Rose. 

[Alan Burns]

Dearie me,

Dawkins, God Delusion, it is one long Floo post, bad God, very bad God.

Hell his fellow Oxford atheists distanced themselves from the book.

Gonnagle.

I once met with the late Bishop Ambrose Griffiths who studied in the same college as Dawkins, and he concurred that many members of this college were ashamed that one of their graduates had written such a dreadful book.

[Maeght]

Funny, you'd have thought the Bishop would have loved the book 

I'm not a great fan of the God Delusion and don't necessarily agree with RD when he gets onto theological areas but when he addresses the supposed scientific arguments of creationists etc he is excellent.

[BashfulAnthony]

Uh oh. It's not only Assertion Burns who needs a stiff dose of Dawkins

I would love to be able to confront Richard Dawkins face to face and convince him that there is much more to our humanity than bigger brains.  There is so much more to reality than his narrow minded scientific approach can ever discover.

Oh dear that is so very FUNNY. He would wipe the floor with you, as the non believers do on this forum! I think you are in total denial about how silly your posts are!

Only if somebody paid the sanctimonious little squirt, and even then I wouldn't bet on it!

[Shaker]

Most of the times I have seen Dawkins, he is respectful. That said we are back at the general worthlessness of debates, particularly formal ones at getting at truth. They are a dark art which can be practised so that truth becomes as necessary to the case as  bagpipes to a string quartet.

Good point - people do tend to forget that essentially debates are an entertainment rather than a studied means of accurately ascertaining truth. In the hands of a skilled exponent of the art they can be thrilling to watch, but as I say, for all that they're still just theatre.

[BashfulAnthony]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

Excellent news!  As little as possible should mean, none at all!   

[jjohnjil]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

Excellent news!  As little as possible should mean, none at all!   

Bashful, I think it's you who should post on this forum far less.  You have a 'Faith sharing' forum where you can all agree with each other to your heart's content! 

If you want to post on a forum that debates the rights and wrongs of Christianity - you give your opinion and listen to other opinions, not whinge the whole time!

[floo]

I suppose constant whinging and rudeness is how some Christian posters on this forum get their kicks. This especially applies to the ones who erroneously think they are right and brighter than the rest. They don't appear see how they come over to others, which is sad really. 

[savillerow]

Msg 1520 AB "I know must exist" Four words all with a punch and no back up, except of course the "I" bit.

[Leonard James]

]

Little but often?

You don't post long posts Leonard, you can normally get your point across in few words 😉

As long as you post often 😀

😜🌹

Thank you blossom! I fear am too weak to shove off completely. 

[BashfulAnthony]

Most of the time I try to hold back from getting involved in these discussions for that very reason, but sometimes it gets just too frustrating and hard to resist it!

Absolutely true! My birthday resolution is going to be "post as little as possible". 

Excellent news!  As little as possible should mean, none at all!   

Bashful, I think it's you who should post on this forum far less.  You have a 'Faith sharing' forum where you can all agree with each other to your heart's content! 

If you want to post on a forum that debates the rights and wrongs of Christianity - you give your opinion and listen to other opinions, not whinge the whole time!

I see you haven't even read my posts today, which contradict your "allegations."  I have discussed my views and explained them, not in a whingeing manner, either.    It's always a good idea to know what you are talking about before you make your claims!  And, incidentally, I find myself being criticised by other Christians repeatedly.

[savillerow]

Msg 1533 "its always a good idea to know what you are talking about before making your claims" " I claim i dont know some things. Some people claim "they know things" that they cant possibly know, they make it up, believe it, peddle it as truth, use it as a basis for judging others, spit nails over being questioned about "said beliefs", ring fence their brains to reason, complain about being persecuted, ridiculed and disrespected when "said beliefs" are examined. Its a constant ying and yang i admit but i live in hope of the world growing out of this faith thing.