Posted on 07/09/2023 1:39:20 AM PDT by spirited irish
Do you believe in Richard Dawkins? If your answer was yes, why? Most of us have assumed Dawkins’ existence based on very little evidence. I for one have never met him. And though I’ve seen a couple of pieces of video footage, a few pictures and his name as author on a number of books, when you think about it, it’s not that substantial. I’ve seen video clips and pictures of ‘Santa Claus’, too. And authors use pseudonyms all the time, so there’s no telling who really wrote The God Delusion or The Greatest Show on Earth. By now you’re probably thinking, ‘Of course he exists; I’ve never seen direct evidence but I have good reason to believe he does.’ And even though your belief is based on faith, it’s a reasonable faith to hold. Ultimately, nothing in this world can be scientifically proven with 100% certainty. As humans with fallible reasoning and limited resources, we often have to come to similarly faith-based conclusions, based on the weight of evidence.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotandliberty.com ...
I like John Macarthur’s description “no one plus nothing equals everything “
This is an instance of 'though they know the truth, meaning that they know they live and are conscious and that matter, neither physical or nonphysical, does not produce either, they reject the truth because they prefer darkness to Light."
Different spelling. 😆😀😁😊
His test returned an answer. It wasn't the one he expected.
I give him kudos for properly using the scientific method. I hope that he acts on what the data is telling him.
One of my favorite authors.
Let’s hope he does. John Newton, composer of Amazing Grace, surely did. On his grave stone, the last phrase, “and appointed to preach the faith, he had long labored to destroy.” I hope the same thing happens to him. It would be nice if some famous atheist, comes to Jesus in simple, childlike faith. It has happened before.
Boghossian: What would it take for you to believe in God?
Dawkins: I used to say it would be very simple. It would be the Second Coming of Jesus or a great, big, deep, booming, bass voice saying “I am God.”...even if there was this booming voice in the Second Coming with clouds of glory, the probable explanation is that it is a hallucination or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield.... A non-supernatural Second Coming could be aliens from outer space.
Boghossian then asks him: So that [stars aligned into a message] couldn’t be enough. So what would persuade you?
Dawkins: Well, I’m starting to think nothing would, which, in a way, goes against the grain, because I’ve always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming.
- Dawkins [essentially] Admits Nothing Can Persuade Him God Exists
Thus, while allowing for the existence of aliens from outer space, the existence of A creator-judge is disallowed even as a hypothesis by such antitheists.
Ask someone: Prove to me you are who you say you are.
* A birth certificate will not suffice (we know they can be forged).
* A driver’s license won’t do (we know they can be bought).
* Your parents’, sibling’s, or friend’s testimony is not proof (we know people lie).
And the list could go on...
Often people do not believe because they don’t want to believe.
I have yet to hear of the printed report of the demise of Mssr. Dawkins.
As to the question of the existence of Mssr. Dawkins, it would seem there are enough examples in print and video, to say ‘he exists’.Now compare that to the figure of faith Mssr. Dawkins debates. No videos, no audio tapes, age old writings with millenia of commentaries.
Yet, there are multitudes who hold to that existence over these same millenia.
I say they BOTH exist, since both interested partieshold to their decision. The attempts by both parties to win friends is long known. I am aloof from both parties, for my own sanity.
God has given all the proof necessary to know beyond a doubt that he exists. Those that refuse to give credit to God for that evidence are willfully blind. Making th3 excuse that evidence “could be an illusion or hallucination” is rediculous- if that is the case, then everything could be an illusion, and nothing is real, not even the arguments against the existence of God.
The fo l lowing is an argument often put forward.
In order to know that evidence for God does not exist, one would have to know all of the evidence that ever existed in order to make that declaration. Since we don’t know all evidence, we can take it on faith based on the evidencethat there is a creator, that God does exist. Those that choose not to believe must also take it o. Faith that he doesn’t exist. They may claim that their rejection is “based on science and not faith”, but since they don’t know all the evidence that ever existed, it is plain that their objection is based on faith, not science after all.
I still stand on being aloof of both parties, of which you are among one of them
my response was to the thread really- your post was the last one at the time
and yes, i’m proudly a true conservative and will always defend that which true conservatives stand for- there is right and wrong- i oppose that which is wrong- -
Dawkins merely takes this tautology and turns it around on God. He admits he is agnostic, not an atheist. Which wasn't useful to the marxists, so they #MeToo'd and cancelled him.
‘Conservatism’ defined by post-Rush examples need more caffiene.
All these known spies need to have as much information extracted, “then tossed to the River Po”.
All these zellouts both in Congress and not, need to be tried for treason, in a weeks time, and then extinguished.
All those that harrbor programs to the detriment of America, need to vanish.
Lobbyists crap on John Q public’s vote, period.
Close them down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.