View Single Post
Old 01-14-2010, 11:34 AM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977

[quote=Enterprise Captain;294846]

Thanks for the suggestion. Apparently Paul Davies has been accused of having a religious agenda but I will take a look and see for myself.

I'm also fine with people believing whatever they want as long as they don't try to force it down my throat and the throats of others but this isn't really a debate about God. The points I'm trying to make here are the following:

1. Science has the right to research Religions claims.
2. Dawkins is not the opposite of a creationist.
3. Dawkins isn't calling all religious people delusional.
4. Dawkins logic is sound.
5. Not only theologians and philosophers have the authority to research religions claims.
6. An atheist can take offence to be being told to go to hell even if they don't believe in it.

Oh, so nice of the Vatican to give me permission to believe in both aliens and the gospel now. What would I do with out their blessing?

Yes, Dawkins cast doubt on Davies. But Davies states categorically that he is no theist.

1. Science does have the right to research religious claims but it won't get very far because the supernatural is outwith the material world

2. Dawkins is trying to prove that God does not exist because evolution does. Plenty of scientists believe in God

3. Dawkins says that God is a delusion. If I believe in something that is a delusion then I am delusional. He is trying to pacify Theists with semantics.

4. Dawkins logic is not sound. You are saying that God is a preposterous idea which is why the appeal to ignorance doesn't work for this. Explain to me what caused the Big Bang. If you can't then the idea of a greater power is not preposterous. Millions of people would be willing to attest to personal experiences of that greater power. Can Dawkins disprove these experiences? I doubt it. There is evidence for the existence of God but there is not enough to state for certainty that he exists. In the same way that there is not enough to prove that he doesn't.

5. You are correct that not just philosophers and theologians have the right to question religion. But don't expect me to pay any credence to a guy with a doctorate in Zoology about questions of philosophy. I don't care much for his opinion on Shakespeare either. But if he wants to write a book on it, so be it.

6. Well you can take offense at being told you are going to hell if you don't believe in God/ Allah. I take offense to being told that the God I have personal experience of is a delusion. So now we are both offended.

The Vatican were telling Roman Catholics they can believe in Extra terrestrial life not you. You clearly are not a Roman Catholic so what the pope says or doesn't say with regards to Extra Terrestrial life really has nothing to do with you. In the same way that what Barack Obama says about Health care reforms has nothing to do with me. I can agree or disagree with it but frankly I don't care enough to do that.

And with that I'm going to get the same bus as Horatio. This debate is going nowhere and until Dawkins can prove God doesn't exist then he can stop calling me delusional and I'll stop calling him an idiot.

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote