by alice.in.wonderland 69 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
What do you think of the atheist idol, Richard Dawkins?
He's generally not iodized as an individual but rather respected for his idealogical thoughts and concepts.
The GB members are idolized because they claim they are the only truly spiritually guided people on earth.( FDSL )
With the world's population at over 6 billion people thats some very special people.
Mrs. J, I think #7, too.
This is what??? 3rd or 4th controvertial topic started, posted on a couple times and then abandoned when she can't stand the heat?
"Jehovah's Witnesses aren't mention in his book"
" yes, they are mentioned in his book,
might be good to read the book yourself."
I've read different parts dealing with Pascal's Wager and homosexuality.
"Mrs. J, I think #7, too.
This is what??? 3rd or 4th controvertial topic started, posted on a couple times and then abandoned when she can't stand the heat?"
I haven't abandoned anything. If I haven't replied it is because I'm doing something else.
A delusion could be schizophrenia--someone that can't tell the rationally
known things from otherwise. A person can believe in God knowing it's a faith
in a possible God beyond the rationally known see-able, etc., things and be just
as reliable regarding the see-able etc. things as someone who doesn't.
Dawkins' stance is that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not
exist, etc.
For a better thought-out book on the possibility of the basic God idea, I
recommend "How to Think about God" by Mortimer Adler.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer_J._Adler#God
Beyond that it's faith. You can know it as such whether you choose to have
it or not.
Dawkins' stance is that belief in God leads to being against science, fanati-
cism, bigotry, etc.
But someone can know the God concept is a faith choice and not mess with the
see-able, etc., whether they believe in God or not, or mess with the see-able,
etc., such as to propagandize for their priority group, whether they believe in
God or not.
Someone can be too 'centric as to be intolerant or worse to others whether
they believe in God or not, or not be too 'centric whether they believe in God
or not.
Someone can cause unnecessary hurt or death whether they believe in God or
not, or not do that whether they believe in God or not.
The main problem is the believers and non-believers who propagandize, are too
'centric, and cause unnecessary hurt or death. We don't need everyone to not
believe in God anymore than we need everyone of one race or nationality for a
more peaceful world. We need people to not propagandize, be 'centric, or cause
unnecessary hurt or death whichever of those categories they're in otherwise--to
be more relaxed about the different categories otherwise.
Where Dawkins goes beyond those things to make a case there shouldn't be
believers in God for the world to be better, he's ironically being 'centric,
and the 'centric ones of the believers and non-believers have caused the most
problems.
When doing so, he's being as boring and preachy as any preacher who bored the
flock asleep with another sermon of 'centric propaganda about how everyone
outside his group are the bad people.
Metacritic reported the book had an average score of 59 out of 100. That
sounds about right.
Alice,
I sent you a PM.
"Actually JWs are mentioned. He makes specific mention of the Creation book as an example of just how badly written Christian books are when discussing evolution.
Your arguments in this and your last thread about other religions being so much worse then the Watchtower is pointless. Why compare JWs with Catholics from 1000 years ago in the dark ages. Compare them to religions that started during the same period with the same scientific understandings, such as Seventh Day Adventists and Christadelphians and other Pacifist religions. There is little difference. The Watchtower is just a product of the times they started. The only way it will continue for future generations is if they change what they are so as to be relevant in the future. "
I'll allow Dawkins to speak on Catholicism if my perspective is pointless. The Catholic Church does have a strong science division in this day and age but the crimes against humanity are still rife within the church.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece
Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI
RICHARD DAWKINS, the atheist campaigner, is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanity”.
Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.
The Creation book was written in (1985). Here's a couple of threads I launched investigating biological evolution:
Feel free to challenge theistic evolution or the integrity of what I've said.
600 million years of vertebrate evolution and no transitional species?
Alice, I have written 2 of Dawkins books. I agree with much of what he write, and i think he is an interesting debator and i wish i had half of his control of the language (even if just in my primary language).
I have a couple of things that annoy me regarding him. First, i think he goes of into hyperboles at times. I think he is to interested in lumbing together all religions as being bad, and im not sure thats really sound logically. Secondly statements such as 'religion is a kind of child-abuse' and a term such as 'history-denier'. It just smell to much of propaganda.
That being said, he is excelent when he discuss science - he make fields i have never interested myself in (biology and palentology) very alive and interesting, and his way of explaining things is something i attemt to duplicate to the extend i can.
No i dont see him as a priest, bishop or anything. i am certain he would hate it if i did that! I disagree with him on points, and i know some of his theories on genetics, etc. are quite debated, but thats another story. Have you read his books? What do you think of him?
ps.
I would recommend you to read his newest book over 'The God Delusion', its more about science and IMHO it is a better book for a religious person to write since it is not hostile all the way through.
I have seen a few of his video's. I have the book and wrote up a summary of all chapters on jwsupportforum.com. It is and interesting read. The book is quite dry and you have to really follow it. Not one of his better books.
Alice, a couple of questions:
I can give you a list of the falsehoods that are featured in the creation book if you do not believe that is true.
