the God Delusion/God is Not Great

[dogsgod]

First you define creationists by the publicly accepted definition of the group who is pushing to have creationism taught in the class room. Then you do a 180 and claim all people who believe in God are creationists...
How about you just pick one and stick to it?

OK, I see your point, but it's not that simple. Dawkins does have an axe to grind as it pertains to creationists that want their beliefs taught in science class, but how does he target creationists by explaining the flaws in their creator concept without catching all believers of a creator God in his net?

 

[Apex]

OK, I see your point, but it's not that simple. Dawkins does have an axe to grind as it pertains to creationists that want their beliefs taught in science class, but how does he target creationists by explaining the flaws in their creator concept without catching all believers of a creator God in his net?

Miller does it quite well in his book Finding Darwin's God.

 

[freethinker44]

OK, I see your point, but it's not that simple. Dawkins does have an axe to grind as it pertains to creationists that want their beliefs taught in science class, but how does he target creationists by explaining the flaws in their creator concept without catching all believers of a creator God in his net?

He doesn't.

Not all theists are creationists though, many don't believe in a literal translation of their books but Dawkins doesn't single out creationists as "bad", he just lumps all members of whichever religion as the same and then tears apart their beliefs as a whole. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, his books aren't really written for theists, they are directed towards atheists and it's been a while since I read it, but I think he even says that in the god delusion somewhere.

 

[dogsgod]

Miller does it quite well in his book Finding Darwin's God.

If it's not one Christian sect trying to get their God into the science class, it's another. All Miller does is try to show that God has his manipulative tentacles intertwined within the evolutionary process. Same BS, different _ _ _hole.

 

[Sententia]

I have read and own both. (Although they are frequently on loan, both are home currently)

The god delusion is an easy read. Rather light with some light hearted humor (Even quotes coulter making fun of him a few times) and some obvious observations. (And a few not so obvious ones.)

There are some great stories and they are referenced. Overall I don't think many would be offended by it but would probably learn quite a bit.

There is no god is witty and would probably offend quite a few people. He obliterates most arguments you have probably ever heard and the tag line of the book, religion poisons everything, is repeated and driven home quite a few times. There a great little section on mormonism hehe. Just thinking about the book is making me crave a scotch and have none... lol... ah well.

 

[Apex]

If it's not one Christian sect trying to get their God into the science class, it's another. All Miller does is try to show that God has his manipulative tentacles intertwined within the evolutionary process. Same BS, different _ _ _hole.

So you have read the book?

 

[Apex]

There a great little section on mormonism hehe. Just thinking about the book is making me crave a scotch and have none... lol... ah well.

What did he do, just copy the standard AM material? I read the pages that were available on that section on Google Books, not impressed. I was hoping he would have presented something new, instead of beating the same old dead horse.

 

[dogsgod]

So you have read the book?

I read excerpts and enough reviews about it. His Christian God rather than the creationist's God is ultimately the reason for the universe. I will admit that he apparently does an excellent job of supporting biological evolution in that he argues for no direct role for God on one hand, but uses quantum mechanics on another, as if. He's obsessed with the anthropic principle, and all the meanings and purposes for humankind that that entails. It's the Christian God that provides all the chances for humans to emerge, thus he offends creationists and their literal acceptance of the creation story, but not all believers, especially Christians like himself. OK, but getting back to Dawkins, how can a non believer of a Christian God creator not ensnare all believers in his net?

 

[Apex]

I read excerpts and enough reviews about it. His Christian God rather than the creationist's God is ultimately the reason for the universe. I will admit that he apparently does an excellent job of supporting biological evolution in that he argues for no direct role for God on one hand, but uses quantum mechanics on another, as if. He's obsessed with the anthropic principle, and all the meanings and purposes for humankind that that entails. It's the Christian God that provides all the chances for humans to emerge, thus he offends creationists and their literal acceptance of the creation story, but not all believers, especially Christians like himself.

It sounds like you would have a problem with any attempt to explain that science and religion can coexist.

 

[richardlowellt]

Just bought the books the God Delusion and God is Not Great. For those of you who have read one or both, what are your opinions? I haven't read them yet, but I'm looking forward to doing so.[/QUOTE

I enjoyed both very much, be here's another to round out your collection, God The Failed Hypothesis (How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist) By Dr. Victor Stenger

 

[Falvlun]

I enjoyed both very much, be here's another to round out your collection, God The Failed Hypothesis (How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist) By Dr. Victor Stenger

Mm. Not sure I like the subtitle of that book. Science can show that God is not necessary to perform many of the traditional goddunnits, since a physical mechanism has been discovered, but it can't really show that god doesn't exist.

 

[dogsgod]

It sounds like you would have a problem with any attempt to explain that science and religion can coexist.

It can't coexist. The scientific method is everything that faith is not.

Robert Green Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer (1833-1899).

"There is no harmony between religion and science. When science was a child, religion sought to strangle it in the cradle. Now that science has attained its youth, and superstition is in its dotage, the trembling, palsied wreck says to the athlete: 'Let us be friends.' It reminds me of the bargain the rooster wished to make with the horse: 'Let us agree not to step on each other's feet.'"

 

[dogsgod]

Mm. Not sure I like the subtitle of that book. Science can show that God is not necessary to perform many of the traditional goddunnits, since a physical mechanism has been discovered, but it can't really show that god doesn't exist.

Why not, it shows that the ether as well as phlogiston does not exist? It explains pretty well everything that people attribute to God, so why not? Or are we to accept the God of the gaps?

 

[richardlowellt]

Mm. Not sure I like the subtitle of that book. Science can show that God is not necessary to perform many of the traditional goddunnits, since a physical mechanism has been discovered, but it can't really show that god doesn't exist.

It does for me, read the book.

 

[Sententia]

What did he do, just copy the standard AM material? I read the pages that were available on that section on Google Books, not impressed. I was hoping he would have presented something new, instead of beating the same old dead horse.

Unfortunately Apex I can't quote the entire section here without violating copyrights etc. (But I honestly wish I could since he eviscerates most mormon arguments so succinctly and completely it is surprising that ones ego would still be intact enough to declare themselves as mormon but then again never underestimate the power of faith of the magic of jesus.

But Hitchen's

1826 a court in Bainbridge, New York, convicted a twenty-one-year-old man of being a "disorderly person and an impostor." That ought to be all we ever heard of Joseph Smith, who at trial admitted to defrauding citizens by organizing mad gold-digging expeditions and also to claiming to possess dark or "necromantic" powers"

He continues on for a few more pages there and in a few other sections with clearly referenced material even fair circles around trying to debate. His discussion naturally evolves beyond the self admitted fraud Joe Smith to others and various aspects of the mormon faith. He does a fantastic job of making his point and I would love to see a live debate between him and an entire of panel of mormons. (I think a whole panel would be needed just to make it fair.)

Nonetheless as I said before, I think many would be offended. But his work is well polished and clearly referenced. A great read.

 

[Sunstone]

The God Delusion is the best book of the 19th Century written on the subject of the philosophy of religion.

 

[Apex]

Unfortunately Apex I can't quote the entire section here without violating copyrights etc. (But I honestly wish I could since he eviscerates most mormon arguments so succinctly and completely it is surprising that ones ego would still be intact enough to declare themselves as mormon but then again never underestimate the power of faith of the magic of jesus.

But Hitchen's



He continues on for a few more pages there and in a few other sections with clearly referenced material even fair circles around trying to debate. His discussion naturally evolves beyond the self admitted fraud Joe Smith to others and various aspects of the mormon faith. He does a fantastic job of making his point and I would love to see a live debate between him and an entire of panel of mormons. (I think a whole panel would be needed just to make it fair.)

Nonetheless as I said before, I think many would be offended. But his work is well polished and clearly referenced. A great read.

I sense some hero worship...

I would love to see a live debate between him and an entire of panel of mormons. (I think a whole panel would be needed just to make it fair.)

Oh please...

 

[Apex]

The God Delusion is the best book of the 19th Century written on the subject of the philosophy of religion.

Still trying to get a free copy of that book...
Anyone have any ideas? (And I do not like libraries, if I read a book I intend on owning it. It drives my wife crazy)

 

[Apex]

It can't coexist.

And this is where you go wrong and why you seem to be unable to look at both sides of the equation. You automatically dismiss one half, no questions asked.

 

[Falvlun]

Why not, it shows that the ether as well as phlogiston does not exist? It explains pretty well everything that people attribute to God, so why not? Or are we to accept the God of the gaps?

How did you interpret that from my statement? We could explain every little thing about the universe, and how it functions, and still not prove that God does not exist. It is impossible. You can't prove the non-existence of something.

It does for me, read the book.

Then I think you misunderstand science.