Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
Dawkins DOES want people to lose their faith, he said so in promotional interviews for his book. He tries so hard at a gimmick of a wise scholar who warmly seeks open debate when in reality he would like nothing mote than for religion to die out. That's his right obviously, I'd respect him more if he was just more honest about it. The number of counter points made in the Dawkins Delusion indicates he put more effort in to trying to destroy someone's faith than researching real facts and quoting scripture accurately.
I know of people who have lost their faith after reading his book and their lives are now miserable as a result. I have no time for the man.
|
In his defence, Dawkins is a well educated man. by no means does it make him an authoritative figure on everything, but he isn't a stupid man.
why do you feel he is not being honest about his intentions if you also state he openly admitted he is trying to get people to lose their faith?
which 'real facts' are you referring to when you say he should look into things in more depth. I agree that if one is to speak about a topic with authority, one should absolutely know what they are talking about.
there will be people whose lives are a misery and a joy regardless of whether or not religion plays a part in their lives. a transition between a heavily religious life to one where God no longer holds any real meaning will of course be tough. it will likely take years to gain that self confidence and elf awareness. after all, that person will have spend the best part of their lives devoting vast amounts of effort, time and dedication into something that suddenly, they find no longer holds merit. but that decision is theirs to make. if they want to dismiss their own findings and go back to God, there is nothing to stop them. and we all know that the church would welcome them back with open arms.
There is no shame in questioning ones beliefs, or indeed being questioned about ones beliefs, be them for or against a subject of any kind. if we all thought the same, it would be a dull place. and as someone who does have faith, you can offer those friends your own time and friendship to help them through. but then, so could someone without faith. in that respect, it makes us no different. we can all be good, caring, considerate people with or without a god in our lives. just because one person chooses to believe and another doesn't, what should it matter? and to that point, why should you allow Richard Dawkins comments to cause you so much upset?
---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
perhaps he's doing religion a favor by separating the wheat from the chaff ,if people loose their faith by reading his book it couldn't have been very strong.
|
exactly. if someone questions their faith, and finds that actually, it no longer makes sense to them, then so be it. likewise, if someone with no faith reads the bible and suddenly thinks that religion is for them, so be it.
The issue I have here, Russ, is that your comments on this thread seem to be very one-sided. that if someone were to read the bible and accept God, you would be absolutely ok with that. But if someone reads something that makes them question their faith, you find that offensive and upsetting. yet in both cases, it will have been the individual's choice to do what they did.
however, when we question indoctrination, which is about manipulating someone into a belief system, you seems to skip around it. you know that manipulating someone into anything is wrong. why should religion be any different? so surely then, by getting people who
may have been indoctrinated into a belief system to question that belief, are we not doing them a favour by allowing them the opportunity to make a fair, unbiased judgement on how they conduct their lives and what they actually want to believe in rather than what they have been told to believe in?