Dawkins 'The God Delusion'

1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)

God? A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist The existence or otherwise of God has attracted a seeming countless debates from all classes of people mainly academics, comprising theologians, scientists and philosophers, not to mention laypersons. Consequently, this singular topic has generated many publications and reviews. Of particular interest are the two opposing views brilliantly presented by William Lane Craig, a popular Christian philosopher and apologist who is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Professor of Philosophy at Dartmouth College. There had been intense rounds of debate on the subject, prominent among which were the one at Dartmouth in 1999 and another at Wooddale Church in 2000. William Lane Craig believes, and firmly too, that God exists while Walter Sinnott-Armstrong would always want to convince his listeners that He does not. These opposing views and more are taken up in the 2003 popular and unique book, God? A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist. The uniqueness of the book, and in fact, its greatest strength can be found in the fact that it was co-authored by opponents, a christian and an atheist. What makes the book more interesting is that it represents the results of an actual debate, where each side not only presents its succinct and polite views but has the chance to actively respond to its opponent with some succinct theological and philosophical sophistication. While they arrive

In this paper, I will argue against the problem of evil, and I will give an adequate amount of information to prove why I believe Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument is not cogent, because although it is strong, all the premises are not true. This paper will also include me explaining, discussing, and evaluating Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument. In the argument, he discusses logical reasonings about why there is a strong argument for why atheism is true.

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

Brown, Neil. "The New Atheism and The Existence of God.” Compass, 46, no. 3, 2-5. Kensington, Australia: Compass, Spring 2012.

In his engaging book, god Is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens is on a mission to combat, what he views as, the “malignant force of religion.” Hitchens considers religion a scourge of society that is responsible for much of what is wrong in the world. “Violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children: organized religion ought to have a great deal on its conscience.” Ultimately, Hitchens makes the case for a secular approach to life and seeks to engage the reader with his central thesis: religion is “manmade” and “poisons everything.” As a well-accomplished writer and journalist, Hitchens displays his plethora

In the article “ On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey attempts to inform his readers that the belief in atheism is a “much more comfortable belief” by effectively using a disdainful rhetoric towards theists and their faith. McCloskey delves into both the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which within he criticizes the arguments and to further his argument against theism, he also presents the Problem of Evil and why evil cannot possibly exist with a perfect God being the creator of universe. What will be displayed in this essay are the counter-arguments to McCloskey’s criticisms and the attempt to discredit his claims that regard the “comfortable” position that lies within atheism and its arguments.

This doesn’t mean trials will be absent from your life, instead by understanding God, though scriptures, and prayer you will know what role trials play in your life.

What Richard Dawkins is trying to say in this piece of superb rhetoric is that if you’ve read the Old Testament that god is a horrendous monster. He regards the god of the Old Testament as the “worst character in all fiction” and when he says fiction it is an statement to show that he himself does not believe in a god. Dawkins says this as a way of introducing the point that he will be attacking the god of the Old Testament. If you look back in the bible God is directly responsible for many mass-murders. God orders the killing of innocent people like in the story of Noah’s ark even after the Ten Commandments says “Thou shall not kill”. Christians today are quick

Mark, I appreciate how you bring out the attempts of Dawkins to refute the existence of God, and the overall belief in science by utilizing the laws of probability, and a computer model of artificial selection to assert major arguments for the improbability of a supreme being. Both the laws of probability and the computer model are man-made examples that man created, therefore can manipulate into any outcome they desire. While the law of probability may be a rule within the scientific realm, why should I choose to believe this concept, since I cannot see it, prove it myself, and furthermore, how do I know that the person who created this law really existed?

1. Religion “Religion is humanity’s oldest philosophy, and most controversial.” (p. 188) The rationalist view of faith finds a reason to believe.

What if there is no heaven? What if there is no hell? John Lennon speculated on this in his song “Imagine”, and many other men in history have produced thought-provoking and controversial works in regards to religious beliefs. We know so little about the world, but yet humans have killed each other in the name of religion. Karl Marx went as far to say that religion is an “opiate of the masses”. In addition to Marx’s statement, Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion raises consciousness at the price of controversy. On one hand, one may be enlightened by a different way of thinking than what is the norm. On the other, people may be inclined to reject the book before they even pick it up simply based on the title. This is the confirmation bias.

The God Delusion is a theoretical work by Richard Dawkins criticizing religion. He introduces it as a book solely dedicated to disproving any God or gods in any religion as a whole, which makes it somewhat odd how in the last few chapters he begins focusing on the social effects of Christianity specifically. He focuses in the brief introduction on why he feels religion should not be given any special allowances in the law, which seems to be one of the areas where either one agrees with it or they don’t. The only part I felt it strange for him to include was when he claimed that Einstein had not believed in the Christian God, but rather a generic, spiritual God. It doesn’t seem like the beliefs of one person should

Jesus told us before being arrested that “In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart, I have overcome the world.” The Apostles including Peter, Paul and James also wrote about the coming sufferings and trials of Christian life. To know of the tribulations is one thing, yet to experience them is another. When trials come, we still don’t know how to make meaning out of the injustice and

I would like to start this paper by formally saying thank you. Thank you for showing me just how small minded and foolish human beings are cable of being. In your book “The God Delusion”, you discussed the bible, specifically the Old Testament, as immoral and should not be used as a moral compass for people to use to give them a sense of direction in their life. Also, you mention the “God character” in the story never doubting the massacres and genocides that accompanied the seizing of the Promised Land, making one think that He practiced genocide and encouraged it. Not only that, but you mentioned the constant punishment – death penalty – the people of God faced when they performed the acts of “cursing your parents; committing adultery; making love to your stepmother or your daughter-in-law; homosexuality; marrying a woman and her daughter; bestiality (and, to add injury to insult, the unfortunate beast is to be killed too) … [and] of course, for working on the Sabbath” (Dawkins 246-250). Lastly, you claim that Jesus Christ – the Son of God; the being that makes up one-third of the Trinity – is different from God or even a “better” version of Yahweh and “undoes the damage and makes it all right” (246-250).