Originally Posted by groverat
And that has been demonstrated to be false, very clearly and definitively.
So despite atheists actually telling you that you are wrong about what you consider "atheism", you still cling to it. Why? Because you are intellectually dishonest and completely unwilling to acknowledge your own dishonesty.
Ok, I recant then. You are right. But then I am also an atheist as I do not believe in the existence of God as described in the major religions in a literal sense but I do belief there is a possibilty he exists.
Am I an atheist?
Also: your dogmatism would be insuting and offensive to people who are capable of being insulted. Luckily I am not but I think your tone does not really help the cause of your debate...it reminds me very much of certain fundies I have known. So sure they are right, so sure that they 'know' and so unwilling to acknowledge someone else thinks in a certain way even if that way is not correct.
It is almost as if the incorrecteness of a view deserves 'punishment'; of course in yours and Dawkins' case that takes the form of derision.
You claimed: When Dawkins claims 'there is no God' - what he is actually saying is there is no God as described in the Bible and other Scripture and that 'God' should He exist, could not have the qualities we ascribe to Him.
I would (more or less) agree with this but Dawkins actually never puts it this way - he just says 'there is no God'.
Yes, I said that and I believe it. My 'crime' was to use the phrase 'he just says' but I know see this was a mistake. I had not realized the degree of petty pedantic debate that would ensue or I would have instead said "Dawkins promotes the view....
I amend that now.
This has been demonstrated a false claim by simply quoting Dawkins's book (even the quote you provided disproves part of the above-quoted assertion, you even contradict yourself within the same thread).
It has been demonstrated to you. You may even be right. But that does not mean it has been demonstrated to me.
In any event Dawkins himself uses other definitions of God in various places and (IMO) some of these are contradictory.
Not only does Dawkins clearly define exactly what he is talking about when he says "god", but he also does not claim that god does not exist. He is very clear on this, as has been shown to you repeatedly.
As I say, if this is true I have only a few minor issues with Dawkins (I will describe them below) and will henceforth consider myself an atheist. An atheist who subscribes to a conception of a God.
I am quite serious about this - I have always believed in the possibility of God whilst rejecting all religious dogma. I believe in evolution so it seems like the perfect belief to me.
I just hope no atheists are going to queue up to tell me I am not one now you have proved I am.
Religion squashes inquiry by claiming an answer before the question is even asked.
Religion indoctrinates young people in dogmatic mindsets and teaches them that they are low-born sinners.
Religion divides families by creating an in-group/out-group mentality.
Religion teaches false things about the world, often with harmful effects and often with the goal of subjugation.
Religion is comprised of mythology and faulty reasoning.
This is the place where if the boot was on the other foot you would start screaming 'LIar!!!!" again isn't it?
These claims are false.
Let's take them one at a time. I won't call you a liar...just point out where you are mistaken.Religion squashes inquiry by claiming an answer before the question is even asked.
"Religion" does not do this. Many religious people have a strange propensity to fall into this error (as have other types of people also).
Western Christianity post-700 CE has a marked tendency to do this but I would not apply it to Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism in the Middle ages or Islam between 800 - 1300 and would argue that in all these cases the opposite can be shown to be true.Religion indoctrinates young people in dogmatic mindsets and teaches them that they are low-born sinners.
This is undoubtedly true of Judeo-Christianity but "religion" no. There is no conception of original sin in Islam for example and even the concept of 'sin' is highly dubious. In some conceptions of Islamic thought the devil is even 'good'. In no case is he 'evil' and 'sin' is not really an issue.
Most religions today do condition young minds (but so do virtually every other system from schools to advertising so it is more a question of 'what' they are being conditioned to) but this was not always the case so again it is untrue to use the balnket term 'religion'.Religion divides families by creating an in-group/out-group mentality.
It divides famililes in extremist religions when a family member wants to leave. I would regard this as cult-behaviour rather than religious.Religion teaches false things about the world, often with harmful effects and often with the goal of subjugation.
On occassion this happens. Again, it does not happen every time and in every case. But it seems like you are saying it does? Are you?
If so then we would only need to find one contra-example in the whole gamut of human history.
As it happens religion often teaches true things about the world. Would you accept this?Religion is comprised of mythology and faulty reasoning.
This is the lamest yet. Very poor.
SOME theological speculation
- perhaps even most, is comprised of faulty reasoning but religion itself cannot possibly be as the reasoning (or lack of it) stems FROM a given religion and is not synonymous with it.
Jesus for example left no system of theological reasoning - this arose after the fact and in opposition to his initial views in many cases.
Again, there are numerous mythological elements in many religions. In many ways, that's what religion actually IS. I think you are missing a very big point. IT doesn't necessarily claim to be TRUE. Some religious maniacs may claim that for a given system but that does not make it the case.
I would also recommend reading the (superior) The End of Faith by Sam Harris. Sadly, I do not have the pdf, but I do have the audio, just ask and I will provide.
I may just do that. You should not think that because I oppose Dawkins I oppose all anti-religious viewpoints.