Richard Dawkins on God's behavior in the OT

[GodsGrace101]

You have it backwards. My worldview, founded on rational thinking, scepticism and science, led me to my agnosticism (and atheism towards all currently identified potential Gods) not the other way around. My dislike of brassicas predated anything that might reasonably be called a worldview, but contributed to its formation.

Aside: regarding conversations with cauliflower, I wouldn't call them conversations. I just tell them to back off and show them a video of slugs.

Your rational thinking gave you your world view.
And what gave you your rational thinking?
Why does man have a conscience?

Do you think I didn't use my rational thinking to decide there must be a God?

And what does your rational thinking say about how we got here, where we're going...or what we're doing here?

Are we like those flies on the wall?

 

[GodsGrace101]

You asked why @ximmix would think you might not like atheists. He provided the post that led him to suspect that was the case. What is dishonest about that?

He may have been mistaken in his interpretation of your intention, but it is a plausible interpretation to make. I have been asked several times what I am doing on a Christian forum and there has usually been an implicit or explicit hostility in the question. (My thanks to those Christians who defended my right to be here on those occassions.)

It would have been more helpful if you had simply said, "Sorry. I can see how you might have misinterpreted my question. I was genuinely interested in what you were gaining from participating in the forum." That would have been preferable to accusing him of dishonesty. Not nice.

This is funny!
You think you could teach an adult person how to behave in any given situation?

It's difficult enough to teach a 4 year old....

You're trying to teach someone something they cannot learn...just like you cannot learn about God just by hearing about Him from someone else.

 

[Ophiolite]

Your rational thinking gave you your world view.

My rational thinking, scepticism and science.

And what gave you your rational thinking?

Evolution.

Why does man have a conscience?

Strong benefits to an evolving, cooperative, social animal.

Do you think I didn't use my rational thinking to decide there must be a God?

I'm sure you did, but perhaps the dash of scepticism was insufficient. (Hence the apparent need for faith.)

And what does your rational thinking say about how we got here, where we're going...or what we're doing here?

My rational thinking and my scepticism and my science tell me we got here by a most serendipitous sequence of events; that we are going where we choose to go and we are doing what we decide we should be doing. As cooperative, social animals, when we use our rational thinking to suppress some of the instinctive baggage we carry with us, those goals can be pretty good ones for all of us.

Are we like those flies on the wall?

I can see a couple of possible meanings for these, but both look wrong. Can you clarify?

This is funny!
You think you could teach an adult person how to behave in any given situation?

No. Why would you think that. I do know I built part of my career out of teaching adults how to behave in specific situations, but that's not what I was doing here. I was alerting @miknik5 to an alternative view of their exchange with @ximmix. I certainly hope this may change their view and their actions in this specific case, but I have no expectations either way.

You're trying to teach someone something they cannot learn...

I'm an optimist. It's part of my rational thinking, sceptical, science-inspired worldview.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Your post #110 is dishonest...

You took two of my responses and pieced them together to support something that I did not even imply...

miknik5, you should probably hit reply at the bottom of each post are responding to. Sometimes it is difficult to know which part of the thread you are following.... and your posts then look a bit like someone coming on and having a random rant. Kind of like Tourette's in writing

 

[ananda]

I understand about not wanting to confront some ideas because they could cause distress.

I understand that there's more peace if these ideas are not confronted.

But how does one stop their brain from thinking?

It depends on the subject one is obsessed upon.

The cure prescribed by the Buddha usually involves opposites. Obsessed with the human form? The prescribed cure: Deconstruct it in the mind by examining it in parts, or in light of old age, illness, and death. Etc.

 

[Ophiolite]

miknik5, you should probably hit reply at the bottom of each post are responding to. Sometimes it is difficult to know which part of the thread you are following.... and your posts then look a bit like someone coming on and having a random rant. Kind of like Tourette's in writing

They probably did that. The post replied to had no original text, only the two earlier posts from @miknik5. Those would not be carried over into the reply.

 

[klutedavid]

we need to use both words and apply it to the same thing, person, situation...

with that said, I am viewing your response as follows: least that is how I am viewing it from your response...using one situation and how these would apply to a person´s stance...either lack of a belief in GOD or deny a belief in GOD...

And what you have said, implies to me that those who had this lack will fair better than those who have denied when all are called forth to be judged.

Please also review your original post as you explained to me that an Atheist is one who lacks a belief in a god...not one who denies god...which is why I asked you to explain what this would mean...and suggested indifference and rebellion...

Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. (American Atheist)

An atheist comes up short in the belief stakes but an atheist cannot deny that God can exist.

No one on earth could make the claim that Jesus was not God in human form. Because no one can ultimately know whether that claim, the claim of the incarnation of the Christ was true or false.

One can believe that Jesus is God or lack that belief that Jesus was God. But no one can formally identify the status of Jesus, because there is no criteria available for mankind in order to do that.

Christianity is built on that bedrock of belief, you must believe in Jesus to be saved!

Atheism stands on the bedrock of the lack of that belief in Jesus, but will never deny that Jesus could be the messiah.

Belief and denial are very different words.

 

[Silmarien]

You asked why @ximmix would think you might not like atheists. He provided the post that led him to suspect that was the case. What is dishonest about that?

He may have been mistaken in his interpretation of your intention, but it is a plausible interpretation to make. I have been asked several times what I am doing on a Christian forum and there has usually been an implicit or explicit hostility in the question. (My thanks to those Christians who defended my right to be here on those occassions.)

It would have been more helpful if you had simply said, "Sorry. I can see how you might have misinterpreted my question. I was genuinely interested in what you were gaining from participating in the forum." That would have been preferable to accusing him of dishonesty. Not nice.

You get that? Really? You're one of the nicest non-theists here. Definitely on my top 5 favorites list.

Come to think of it, now I'm curious: what are you doing here? Did you join before you lost faith and just stick around or are you here to try to get people to accept evolution or what precisely?

Seriously, though. Stick around. You're always welcome. I don't spend as much time in Apologetics as I used to, but it's always nice to see rational, respectful debate instead of the normal nonsense.

 

[klutedavid]

Tell me the worldview of an atheist. Pretty sure there are as many worldviews among atheists as there are actual atheists.

The prevailing worldview of an atheist is a lack of belief in Gods. A lack of belief in a higher order of beings (Gods). A lack of belief in beings (Gods) from other dimensions that are greater than us.

An atheist lacks a belief in a spiritual, undetectable realm, inhabited by a spiritual being (God). An atheist lacks the belief that a spiritual being (God) can transcend space time.

That is a distinctive worldview and is shared by all atheists.

 

[klutedavid]

I was a Christian when I started here. I saw no reason to leave. I enjoy the conversations I have here.

If you once believed in the death and resurrection of the Christ. How did that belief of yours deteriorate into a lack of belief, in the death and resurrection of the Christ?

 

[klutedavid]

I think that no one should stand in the way of happiness, and religion has dug their heels in to create misery for people...

Christianity should be pure joy in the Holy Spirit. If it's not joy then that was not Christianity.

Atheism has no promise of eternal life, so it is a short lived paradigm. Atheism is temporal, transient, has no hope. Atheists all grow old and miserable, then they die.

If you think that you will be happy for the rest of your life as an atheist. Then you are very mistaken in that opinion of yours.

Have you noticed that as you get older you happiness level subsides?

 

[Tinker Grey]

If you once believed in the death and resurrection of the Christ. How did that belief of yours deteriorate into a lack of belief, in the death and resurrection of the Christ?

I appreciate your interest. I've told the story a few times. I'm not in the mood to do it again. Sorry.

 

[Ophiolite]

You get that? Really? You're one of the nicest non-theists here. Definitely on my top 5 favorites list.

You are only saying that because you haven't met me in person.

Come to think of it, now I'm curious: what are you doing here? Did you join before you lost faith and just stick around or are you here to try to get people to accept evolution or what precisely?

Several reasons. I've posted them on a few occasions before. If anyone bothers to track them down they may well find they vary - certainly the emphasis may shift, depending on why I am there on that particular day. With those caveats in mind here in more or less random order, at least as far as I am consciously aware, are my reasons for being on the forum.

• I like forums.
• I come here to learn facts. That is achieved in three ways:
  • I note what members assert
    
  • I follow links provided by members
  • I research my answers, where necessary, to assure their accuracy
• I come here to expose myself to alternative views on a broad range of subjects
• I enjoy a good debate
• I like to practice my rhetoric
• I seek to offer corrections on misunderstandings or misinterpretations of scientific findings or methods.
• I don't shy away from pointing out how misleading statements, oft repeated after correction, call into question the integrity of the poster. (This may be against forum rules, but it is not against a sound moral code.) Is that a reason to be here? "Wait. I can't come now. I've found someone lying on the internet and I have to put a stop to it."
  
• I find it interesting to observe how the character - at least the online character - of members emerges over a series of posts.
• I was forced into retirement at the age of 70 and haven't managed to get back into the job market yet. I've got to do something!

You did ask.

Oh. Almost missed the second point. My faith evaporated decades before the first forum appeared. In regard to evolution I have often stated that if someone wishes to deny evolution because it conflicts with their faith, runs counter to their understanding of Scripture, or is at odds with what they perceive as a personal revelation, then I can fully respect that. What I do not respect and find no reason to tolerate are attempts to deny the range and depth of the evidence for evolution. Such behaviour seems to me reprehensible.

Seriously, though. Stick around. You're always welcome. I don't spend as much time in Apologetics as I used to, but it's always nice to see rational, respectful debate instead of the normal nonsense.

I have no plans to depart. I take an occassional rest for a week or a month when I find the actions (or more often the inactions) of staff are contributing to an elevated blood pressure.

So, thank you for your kind comments. Praise from a Numenorean is always welcomed by a Tolkien afficionado.

 

[Ophiolite]

That is a distinctive worldview and is shared by all atheists.

No. Some of them just never give it the slightest thought ever.

If you think that you will be happy for the rest of your life as an atheist.Then you are very mistaken in that opinion of yours.

Ah. Really. And here I was thinking that my goal in life should be to contribute to the well-being of others and of the planet at large rather than focusing on my own personal gratification. And of course you are quite right. My inability as an individual to do much to halt, for example, global warming does not make me happy, but I don't see that as a reason to stop.

 

[Silmarien]

Several reasons. I've posted them on a few occasions before. If anyone bothers to track them down they may well find they vary - certainly the emphasis may shift, depending on why I am there on that particular day. With those caveats in mind here in more or less random order, at least as far as I am consciously aware, are my reasons for being on the forum.

• I like forums.
• I come here to learn facts. That is achieved in three ways:
  • I note what members assert
    
  • I follow links provided by members
  • I research my answers, where necessary, to assure their accuracy
• I come here to expose myself to alternative views on a broad range of subjects
• I enjoy a good debate
• I like to practice my rhetoric
• I seek to offer corrections on misunderstandings or misinterpretations of scientific findings or methods.
• I don't shy away from pointing out how misleading statements, oft repeated after correction, call into question the integrity of the poster. (This may be against forum rules, but it is not against a sound moral code.) Is that a reason to be here? "Wait. I can't come now. I've found someone lying on the internet and I have to put a stop to it."
  
• I find it interesting to observe how the character - at least the online character - of members emerges over a series of posts.
• I was forced into retirement at the age of 70 and haven't managed to get back into the job market yet. I've got to do something!

You did ask.

Oh. Almost missed the second point. My faith evaporated decades before the first forum appeared. In regard to evolution I have often stated that if someone wishes to deny evolution because it conflicts with their faith, runs counter to their understanding of Scripture, or is at odds with what they perceive as a personal revelation, then I can fully respect that. What I do not respect and find no reason to tolerate are attempts to deny the range and depth of the evidence for evolution. Such behaviour seems to me reprehensible.

Very cool. Thank you.

Was there any reason you specifically chose a religious forum? I've seen people say that they were looking for a place to talk to conservatives (which was actually my major reason before converting), but it otherwise strikes me as an unusual choice.

So, thank you for your kind comments. Praise from a Numenorean is always welcomed by a Tolkien afficionado.

Haha, I always get a kick out of how many people around here can point out my namesake's royal pedigree.

 

[Ophiolite]

Was there any reason you specifically chose a religious forum? I've seen people say that they were looking for a place to talk to conservatives (which was actually my major reason before converting), but it otherwise strikes me as an unusual choice.

I primarily posted on science forums. I was a moderator on five such forums and an admin on one of them for a while (not all under the Ophiolite name).

I drifted away from these through boredom in some cases and differences of opinion over how "unconventional" posters should be handled. (I favoured gentle guidance, reserving the nuclear option for irredeemanble ignorance.) And now I am drifting from your question.

The science forums were often beset by YECs, challenging - usually ineptly - evolution. I found my knowledge of evolutionary theory was greatly expanded by the reading I did in textbooks, historical reviews and research papers, when seeking to make a detailed rebuttal of YEC arguments. I suppose my initial visit here was to seek out any new arguments the YECs might have.

Also, I visit all kinds of forums. As I noted earlier I want to expose myself to different viewpoints. In most cases I am not motivated to join, though I've lurked in a handful for a while till I have a feel for their ambience. CF had the science sub-fora, so membership seemed natural: I probably read something I disagreed with that was in urgent need of correction.

We seem to be drifting off topic, so my apologies to the OP. More in line with the topic, I like some of Dawkins later books on science, but I object to the style of his attacks on religion. I remarked online several years ago and have repeated it several times since, "I wouldn't even vomit on his hamburger." Daniel Dennet can deliver surgical attacks without resorting to playground bully tactics. Dawkins would benefit from a little more introspection.

Thus, staying back on track, what would you say is the best counter argument to Dawkins' interpretation of God's behaviour as reported in the OT? Ideally, something that is available online.

 

[klutedavid]

No. Some of them just never give it the slightest thought ever.

Ah. Really. And here I was thinking that my goal in life should be to contribute to the well-being of others and of the planet at large rather than focusing on my own personal gratification. And of course you are quite right. My inability as an individual to do much to halt, for example, global warming does not make me happy, but I don't see that as a reason to stop.

No. Some of them just never give it the slightest thought ever.

Ah. Really. And here I was thinking that my goal in life should be to contribute to the well-being of others and of the planet at large rather than focusing on my own personal gratification. And of course you are quite right. My inability as an individual to do much to halt, for example, global warming does not make me happy, but I don't see that as a reason to stop.

You can and will, spend your life doing what you think is important to you. The fact is that you just age, suffer, and die.

What you choose to do in life is irrelevant, because the same predestined fate awaits us all. In life, there are no winners or losers, there is no idealism that matters. There is only a transient, quick existence, then it all goes silent.

On your death bed will the forests in Brazil matter?

Days before your departure will you be reading the financial news or the sport?

How do I know all this will happen?

Because people I knew passed away and yes, I visited them often in hospital. I watched the transition from denial to a reluctant acceptance of their looming fate. They were all quiet and lost in thought. They were not smiling but had differing degrees of anger, resentment, not too interested in conversation.

When those fateful days arrive for you, I can promise you that, you will not be thinking about global warming.

Whether mankind stops warming the planet, disarms nuclear weapons. Stops the world population growing beyond the planets ability to sustain it. In the end everyone dies anyway.

So what was the mysterious purpose of this very short life in the first place?

 

[Ophiolite]

On your death bed will the forests in Brazil matter?

Of course they will. I may be selfish, but I'm not that selfish. And no, I shall not be thinking much about the rain forest when breathing my last, but I shall be hoping that I have left a legacy of children and grandchildren who are worrying about it and will communicate that same concern to their offspring.

So what was the mysterious purpose of this very short life in the first place?

I've answered that already. There is no purpose until we give it one. You and I are the product of 3.5 billion years of succesful evolution. We owe it to our ancestors and to our descendants not to drop the ball.

As to the rest of your post, what a sad, bleak perspective you seem to have. I hope you may come to see things differently in time. To maximise that time please, during this present crisis, pay close attention to such matters as hand washing, social distancing, et cetera. Be careful. Be aware.

 

[miknik5]

You asked why @ximmix would think you might not like atheists. He provided the post that led him to suspect that was the case. What is dishonest about that?

He may have been mistaken in his interpretation of your intention, but it is a plausible interpretation to make. I have been asked several times what I am doing on a Christian forum and there has usually been an implicit or explicit hostility in the question. (My thanks to those Christians who defended my right to be here on those occassions.)

It would have been more helpful if you had simply said, "Sorry. I can see how you might have misinterpreted my question. I was genuinely interested in what you were gaining from participating in the forum." That would have been preferable to accusing him of dishonesty. Not nice.

I suggest you follow the full conversation before posting something that is also dishonest and also misrepresents what I said and meant..

 

[miknik5]

miknik5, you should probably hit reply at the bottom of each post are responding to. Sometimes it is difficult to know which part of the thread you are following.... and your posts then look a bit like someone coming on and having a random rant. Kind of like Tourette's in writing

LOL...sorry...