tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post191974939673192352..comments2023-10-08T12:11:52.993+13:00Comments on New Zealand Conservative: Woman Credits Dawkins' 'God Delusion' With Becoming CatholicLucia Mariahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10485990994973953860noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-43856421998398862092014-04-26T11:31:39.978+12:002014-04-26T11:31:39.978+12:00I read the God Delusion, and many of his comments ...I read the God Delusion, and many of his comments were obnoxious, condescending and irrelevant to any reasoned discussion he may have seemed to have mounted. <br /><br />The book took me by surprise - I expected way better. Any Christian reading it and expecting to see a showcase of the intellectual superiority of the new atheist, will simply find a man offering new prejudices.ZenTigernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-38393099070759789882014-04-22T21:41:01.446+12:002014-04-22T21:41:01.446+12:00Woman reads book, fails to understand it. Movie at...Woman reads book, fails to understand it. Movie at 7.<br /><br /><br />Hundreds, thousands, nay, millions of people have read The Bible and as a direct result have become atheists.Leftrightoutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-10452377879491459002014-04-16T19:13:33.105+12:002014-04-16T19:13:33.105+12:00I think there's a cross-cultural miscommunicat...I think there's a cross-cultural miscommunication involved, in that for people like Dawkins (and me), faith is totally irrelevant to an assessment of rational arguments for and against the existence of God. That probably looks like willful ignorance and obnoxious arrogance to people with faith, but for us, in-depth knowledge of theology or any particular religion isn't necessary, because the principles of evidence for or against a claim are universal. I don't see any prospects for reconciliation anytime soon.pmiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-49700646052485571632014-04-16T10:52:59.256+12:002014-04-16T10:52:59.256+12:00I think a better book in this vein is Lloyd Geerin...I think a better book in this vein is Lloyd Geering's latest "From the Big Bang to God". I don't agree with Geering's theology, but the man does know what he's talking about.Tessnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-86296255754544488702014-04-16T10:48:43.037+12:002014-04-16T10:48:43.037+12:00I have skimmed The God Delusion and I don't th...I have skimmed The God Delusion and I don't think it's arguments are "clear, coherent and painstakingly-constructed". <br /><br />The problem is that Dawkins is not a professor of theology, religious studies, or philosophy, so when he comes out with his "devastating" arguments against faith he isn't very convincing to people with any depth of understanding. I'm not saying that his critiques against religion don't have validity, because they do, but these are not critiques against faith, but against human evil. <br /><br />Rather than place Dawkins against the straw-man of venal, self-serving, controlling religious, if you placed Dawkins against say Thomas Merton, St John of the Cross, or St. Hildegard of Bingen then he falls flat. <br /><br /><br /><br />Instead Dawkins preaches to the converted, playing into their already present bigotry and misunderstanding of faith. The god that Dawkins does not believe it, well people with a deep faith do not believe in that god either. <br /><br /><br />I haven't read the book from cover to cover, so I can't say that the book offers _no_ arguments, but what I did skim through was very superficial and lacked a solid philosophical or theological dimension.Tessnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-62573625358699980422014-04-14T16:54:15.338+12:002014-04-14T16:54:15.338+12:00There isn't any flattering alternative. Whate...There isn't any flattering alternative. Whatever else you might say about "The God Delusion," it consists of clear, coherent and painstakingly-constructed arguments. I can picture religious people disputing those arguments or offering counter-arguments, but to claim the book offers no arguments is either idiocy or willful ignorance.pmiltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-16058793609685739652014-04-12T14:52:59.958+12:002014-04-12T14:52:59.958+12:00Dawkins is extremely arrogant. His autobiography i...Dawkins is extremely arrogant. His autobiography is sad and pompous . read itpaul scottnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-27614175604918699662014-04-12T00:17:48.935+12:002014-04-12T00:17:48.935+12:00She's hardy an imbecile. I quote from her bio,...She's hardy an imbecile. I quote from her bio,<br /><br />"About jbabarsky<br /><br />Judith R. Babarsky, MS, MA, is a Licensed Professional Counselor engaged in private practice for the past 22 years. A graduate of Holy Apostles College and Seminary with a Bioethics concentration, she teaches the undergraduate Intro to Bioethics class and is also a Teaching Assistant for graduate level Dogmatic Theology classes. A convert to Catholicism, she has a strong commitment to bioethical and social justice issues."Tessnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-58864121010805519122014-04-11T12:16:28.937+12:002014-04-11T12:16:28.937+12:00Did you click through to see the comment of an Ama...Did you click through to see the comment of an Amazon review that someone else posted? :)<br /><br /><i>I started reading this thinking that I might read a logical, skeptical, nay scientific critique of religion. Instead, I found something right out of a Boston Globe editorial on a bad day: strings of pejorative adjectives pretending to be argument, bald assertion pretending to be evidence, an incredibly arrogant attitude, and a stance of moral equivalence incapable of distinguishing between the possible strengths and weaknesses of different religions, including the militant atheism Dawkins advocates. This is not academic analysis, it is bad journalism.</i>Fletchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38893560.post-60813189433002141702014-04-11T12:15:06.756+12:002014-04-11T12:15:06.756+12:00Did you click through to see the comment of an Ama...Did you click through to see the comment of an Amazon review that someone else posted?<br /><br /><i>I started reading this thinking that I might read a logical, skeptical, nay scientific critique of religion. Instead, I found something right out of a Boston Globe editorial on a bad day: strings of pejorative adjectives pretending to be argument, bald assertion pretending to be evidence, an incredibly arrogant attitude, and a stance of moral equivalence incapable of distinguishing between the possible strengths and weaknesses of different religions, including the militant atheism Dawkins advocates. This is not academic analysis, it is bad journalism.</i>Fletchnoreply@blogger.com