A question for all belivers

[Rough_ER]

If you don't want to read the new book you could always start with "A devil's Chaplain" which should allow you to learn a lot more about him. He really is an incredibly spiritual man and is so often misrepresented as being a bit of a pompous ***. I personally think he has a beautiful mind. Plus, it's always good to see a crusty old man arguing about gay rights with a fundamentalist Christian on tv.

 

[Booko]

I'm not a believer, but I would read Dawkins. I am especially interested in whether he presents any arguments debunking the alarming notion that gnome gnapping is a socially acceptable spiritual path.

He doesn't bring it up -- lucky for me!

 

[Booko]

Your mind would be a fun one to read! :hug: I imagine there's a lot going on in there!

Yeah, but as a Mom, most of it terribly terribly mundane! :sleep:

Sunstone addresses an important factor- what is Dawkins' positon on the universal morality of gnome gnapping, and how it is practised by many faiths as a form of celebration. (And general rabble rousing, gnaturally.)

While he doesn't state so outright, I suspect Dawkins is in favor of rabble rousing, but that's to be expected, since he's a practitioner of that spiritual path himself.

 

[Booko]

Sadly Dr Dawkins does not go into detail on the question of Gnome Gnapping, but my mind is ever open so I would be interested to know more.

As for my flippant remark about 'the faithful' those who get to know me know I will throw stones in puddles to see what kind of ripples they make!

You'll love this place, then.

Just wait till you start learing about the lesvian dwarfs...

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Nah. Anyone whose only concept of God seems to be the God of supernatural theism (as seen in Newsweek magazine) doesn't have anything new or informative to say.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I could not finish the book. I found his style to be smug and bombastic. His logic is vapid and the impetus mean spirited.

 

[Sunstone]

I haven't finished The God Delusion yet. So far it's been interesting enough, although it hasn't covered too much that's really new.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

Are you open minded enough to read Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'? Could you, given that you know at the outset that it sets out to show the paucity of reason/evidence behind all religions?

Sure, but I don't think I would go out and spend money on it. Just because it would probably bore me out of my mind, I've heard it all before I'm sure...

 

[Sunstone]

Sure, but I don't think I would go out and spend money on it. Just because it would probably bore me out of my mind, I've heard it all before I'm sure...

I don't know, Sweetheart, the book seems to be written for your age group or perhaps just a little older. It's pretty clear prose. I'm not saying you should buy it, but if you ever run across it in a library, you might thumb through it to see whether it interests you.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

I don't know, Sweetheart, the book seems to be written for your age group or perhaps just a little older. It's pretty clear prose. I'm not saying you should buy it, but if you ever run across it in a library, you might thumb through it to see whether it interests you.

Well, I might look into it, but my parents would flip if they even figured out I was reading it.

 

[Sunstone]

Well, I might look into it, but my parents would flip if they even figured out I was reading it.

You know, that thought crossed my mind after I posted --- that your parents might not be too pleased with your reading The God Delusion.

 

[robtex]

Are you open minded enough to read Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'? Could you, given that you know at the outset that it sets out to show the paucity of reason/evidence behind all religions?

Or will you dismiss it without having evaluated the ideas put forward?

I have only read part of one Dawkin book. It was "The Selfish Gene" which was a very humbling experience to read. The man is brillant in both his technical knowledges of the earth sciences and his ablity to express extremely complexed ideas in a way that lay people (like myself) could understand. I will probably get around to reading it but if I had the opporunity to read a Dawkins book I would be more apt to pick another organic science book he wrote over a book about a God I don't believe in anymore than he does.

 

[Rough_ER]

I have only read part of one Dawkin book. It was "The Selfish Gene" which was a very humbling experience to read. The man is brillant in both his technical knowledges of the earth sciences and his ablity to express extremely complexed ideas in a way that lay people (like myself) could understand. I will probably get around to reading it but if I had the opporunity to read a Dawkins book I would be more apt to pick another organic science book he wrote over a book about a God I don't believe in anymore than he does.

Read "The Extended Phenotype!". Richard considers it his greatest achievement in his life and I can see why. The book is truly sensational and will bring a lump to your throat in places. Biology is beautiful, I love that Dawkins emphasizes that point so much in his books.

 

[Ernestine]

I haven't read Dawkins but he is saying precisely what the Bible says, that religious as it exists today is not representative of God. That is why the book of Revelation speaks of the destruction of Babylon the Great, i.e. the worldwide empire of false religion because throughout the centuries it has misrepresented God. If Dawkins is saying to take a good hard look at religion, yes, I would give him message a look.

 

[painted wolf]

I'll get around to reading Dawkins some day.

I really enjoy the works of Gould and Sagan!!

wa:do

 

[lilithu]

Are you open minded enough to read Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'? Could you, given that you know at the outset that it sets out to show the paucity of reason/evidence behind all religions?

Or will you dismiss it without having evaluated the ideas put forward?

Great, another evangelical atheist thumping Dawkins' book.

I read "The Blindwatchmaker" and "Climbing Mount Improbable" diligently. Now that he's become a full-fledged anti-religionist ideologue, I see no reason to be "open-minded" enough to keep listening to him any more than I should be "open-minded" enough to listen to James Dobson.

 

[jonny]

Are you open minded enough to read Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'? Could you, given that you know at the outset that it sets out to show the paucity of reason/evidence behind all religions?

Or will you dismiss it without having evaluated the ideas put forward?

I'm open minded enough to read it, but I probably won't. It sounds boring, and I'm not much of a reader anyway. It usually takes me about two years to finish a book (I'm serious); therefore, I'm very selective about what I read. I have three books on my nightstand that I've been working on for over a year already.

 

[TommyN]

Let me just say that if one decides to study the theory of evolution they study something True being interpreted through a relative and, fragmented my time mind. Not only that but it is purely a physical study and does not take into question the mind and thoughts for these are truly who you are. Thoughts are spiritual. First of all Life is the creator of all things. He has permitted us time(darkness) as a separation from the complete that we would be the knowers of the One and only Being and become one with Him. Our minds are formed by our teachers through knowledge which in turn reveals who we are. Charles Darwin wasn't exactly lying he was telling part of the Truth and where his mind had come from (the animal part of his make up was the only part of himself he identified with). This is the Carnal mind written about in the Bible. Adam was not evolved he was a Son (seed) of God whose sons were also Sons (seed) of God who was sowed by God in the field (the evolved animal people referred later on in the bible as the Gentile Goy in Hebrew). The bible does not deal with these people but only the Adamic race. By the way we are all mixed. Adam is the precious missing link that the scientist so intensely search for but will never find for Adam's body was not like ours and disintegrated after his death but his seed (God's seed) was passed on to Seth, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, the twelve sons of Israel, Jesus, and to His Spiritual sons and daughters today. Now through knowledge we can choose which seed we identify with and perfect that part of us. The Truth however cannot be altered by your theory or mine for it is actual, it is the reality. The Truth uses you whether you know it or not. The Truth is only precious in the presence of the false (illusion) just as Light is only precious because of darkness yet darkness must leave when ever Light enters. Truth is what remains forever and illusion is something that appears and then disappears. There are the people whom God chose to be the illusion people and then those that will remain forever. The ones that God is concerned with are not the temporary but the permanent ones the others are just used a fertilizer to the crop he intends to harvest. Jesus was the Truth (God) because he knew the Truth (God) and God used Jesus. Jesus did not have free will. Free will is the choice. You might say what about the evil of this world well that is part of the choice. When we watch shows about the animal kingdom and we see something like a lion killing a small baby calf of lets say a elephant we are so easy to say thats just how an animal is. True its his nature so is it with the animal people of this world. The over flowing of prisons testify to the existence of these kinds of people that Charles identified himself with. However these people have also benefitted from the Son (seed) of God sojourning amongst them because if not for the Seed of God this world would not even be. If you want to see yourself as in charge fine go on learning and learning and never coming to know the Truth. You will continue to view Life through a fragmented mind and the world will just have its way with you. Insanity is not far off from that kind of thinking. There is only two kingdoms (the animal and the Truth) one remains forever the other is an illusion.

 

[painted wolf]

so I take it that this a long winded NO.

wa:do

 

[TommyN]

LOL. I would read the book. Dawkins wants to show the reason for religion? He may very well be able to do that for religion is just another relative fragmented mind like Dawkins giving its view point on the True. The God of Life has nothing to do with religion. The Truth is hid on purpose and is only valued because of the presence of the illusion. We are the illusion and Life Himself is the Truth so become one with Him. God chose who would remain in illusion and whom He would deliver from it only after they had learned their lessons.