The Bias of Richard Dawkins and Atheism- Part 1

A look into the "struggle" between science and Christianity through a chapter in a book by Dr. Tim Keller. Keller is the senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. His book, The Reason for God, is an excellent book which combats many of the issues we deal with today as Christians in regards to apologetics and the defense of the faith. Where his book is a little heavy on philosophy and light on scriptural reference, nevertheless the book is quite biblical and a wonderful tool for gaining insight into the explanations and reason for God.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• God
• Jesus
• Christ
• Tim
• Keller
• reason
• faith
• science
• Richard
• Dawkins
• atheism
• unbelief
• truth
• scriptures
• Bible

[raintree93]

I wonder why the idea that the two creation stories in genesis might be allegorical in nature is so scary to so many.

[bberchin]

The idea of that is not scary, it's just not true. I've entertained that thought in the past, particularly before I became a believer. Not until you study scripture and the Hebrew in those accounts do you really understand the historicity of the account.

[1BloodWolf87]

Dang... the Richard Dawkins puppets are going after you dude. Lol, you make good points and they are just trying to defend their leader. Good job man.

[bberchin]

I never get a break! Thanks.

[indoctus41]

This speaker is off the mark.

Dawkins has said on numerous occasions that the concept of God is outside of science, and for that reason science is unconcerned with His existence.

Dawkins' own personal view is that God doesn't exist, but that is not a scientific statement, which he freely admits. He has also stated that he cannot rule out God's existence.

[Vynjira]

The problem is, Science has proven God does not exist in any form that science recognizes as reality. Thus God may as well not exist, because there is no interaction between God and Humans.

You chose to believe in one of many different belief systems that cannot be "proven" over a tool to understand reality. This is your problem, not mine.

Science is a tool for human understanding.. Your label that science is a god to some people, is proof of your insanity.

[ZotDudot7]

@ShaolinSoldier Towards or against? I hope you meant "against" in the traditional sense. Pardon my grammar Nazism.

[ShaolinSoldier]

What is your point? Of coursed atheists are biased. I have a bias towards idiocy and fallacy.

[ShaolinSoldier]

Dawkins is good, I prefer Hitchens. You religious people are ridiculous.

[ericdelossantos1]

this just shows how people are hellbent on beliving in god, they just have to beleive its too scary for them to wtness the world for what it really is, a hostile wolf eat wolf playground.

[kauaiphil]

Lame.

[dagspoket]

The biblical accounts can't be reliable because it's an ancient book that's been translated between many different languages numerous times by different people. Even the original versions can't be trusted, because those who wrote it can't be identified, and few of the important events mentioned in the bible are mentioned in other works of literature from that time.

Just because some random book with holy in the title says something doesn't make it true.

[Ozzyman200]

The Theist Challenge

It's been 1000s of years, and 1000s of gods have been invented or believed in. Never has anyone managed to provide decent evidence or reasoning for there being a god. Can anyone? This is the challenge. Do you have the faith to take it up? I certainly don't.

[iDaruma]

You people are so silly.

[raintree93]

@1BloodWolf87 This is why there is so much animosity. Puppets? Was that necessary? Perhaps some of us came to similar conclusions without the assistance of professor Dawkins.

[raintree93]

@bberchin Well, I actually have. I have a degree in religious studies, and grew up in a church that believed literally in the bible. It wasn't until my early 30s that I began looking into things I'd never really had a good answer for that I started to doubt the literal account(s).

I still think there is room there for significant interpretation- especially considering the fact that in ancient civilizations this was what they did- they told stories.