Dawkins - 'The God Delusion'

I have not read Dawkins latest book. But, it logically seems to me, that the title tells us everything we need to know, especially since Dawkins is the most eminent fire breathing atheist media-evangelist today.Atheists account for the irrational Deity beliefs of believers by saying material forces created our brains and the brain created the idea of "God."In other words, Evolution (as explained by Dawkins and other evolutionists is God). Evolution created God and since "Evolution" has no ability to speak, Dawkins is its Prophet.Dawkins is simply saying that he is God since God is a delusion created by Evolution (= material forces = Materialism).According to the Bible this is Satan's goal: get us to take the place of God like he attempted to do before he got booted. The Bible corresponds to reality.Ray Edited by Herepton, : No reason given.

In context of the previous material, I said that the brain was created by material forces/Evolution. In turn the idea of "God" was created by the brain. All "gods" originate in the brain (they have no external existence) = the atheist-evolutionist explanation for the "existence" of ANY "god."Ray

The subject of this thread is Dawkins book and things related.I think your question is off-topic.Ray

Negative.Lets use Muslims as an example.Bible-based faith reveals two revelations; general and special.General Revelation: the witness of physical reality.Special Revelation: the Abrahamic Covenant; Mosaic law; N.T. gospel.According to the Bible, as long as a person conforms to the General Revelation they are not deluded.What is the General Revelation given to all humanity?That things seen directly correspond to the power and mind of an invisible Divine Creator. Muslims believe reality was, and is, the product of a Divine Creator.Who then is deluded?Anyone who denies that physical reality is not the product of a Divine Creator.Ray

It leaves them in the same place as the Muslims or any other revelatory faith which believes that a Divine Deity created reality.Ray

Again, book title ("The God Delusion") tells us that Dawkins is arguing that anyone who believes in God is deluded.Could we expect an atheist like Dawkins (or yourself) to believe anything else?Ray

Atheism is irrational since any objective description of physical reality must conclude that an invisible Divine Deity is responsible.You are blind grinding an absurd axe.RayEdited by Herepton, : No reason given.

We are only talking about the religions which believe in a universal Divine Deity, aka: "Creator."The point which you seem to continually miss is the common denominator: Creator (whoever and whichever) is responsible for the production of reality. This is the common denominator of agreement. Not true as argued above. Illogical.Theists and Atheists (antonyms) disagree. IF they do not then one is not genuinely as such, and we are talking about worldviews here and not anything else like social issues, politics etc.etc. Theism is the belief that a universal Deity created the world and life as we know it and is knowable intruding into the affairs of mankind. Deism believes the same except the Deity is not knowable and does not intrude into the affairs of mankind.Atheism denies the existence of the supernatural.Your blue box comment says absolutely nothing since the common denominator of atheism (see above) was never in dispute.Perhaps I have misunderstood.May I also point out that most evolutionists *claim* to be theists.Ray

I said "we" meaning Randman and I.The point is that there is universal agreement between many religions: reality was made by A Divine Deity. You have misunderstood.Name is not at issue, function is. That function (universal Creator) is a common denominator belief of many religions - not a matter of opinion.Ray

Deliberate gross misrepresentation = disappointing way of indicating a loss of interest in the issue or subject.Usually, persons who do not want to discuss things do not create a post.Ray

Since you agree with Dawkins, what causes the God delusion? How did you escape the delusion?Ray

In other words, you explain religious convictions to derive from "following the crowd" or the more scholarly phrase "culturally transmissible"?Hardly a satisfying answer since the word "delusion" (negative force) is at issue. Now, by your own testimony, you have simply come under the influence of a different crowd (delusion). Am I correct in pointing out that Dawkins never defined the title of his book? If so, the title is essentially a red herring.We know for a fact that many African slaves with no cultural exposure to Western religions, after going through slavery and emancipation, then learning how to read and write, when writing their memoirs, said the Gospel message brought them the knowledge of how to respond to the God who had revealed Himself to them, via nature, back in Africa. So you never had a life-changing experience with Jesus the Christ? Did you not say (upthread) that you were a Christian well versed in theology? In other words, you knew your Bible verses, but not the God behind the logia?Pity.Now, like Dawkins, you thump the Origin of Species instead of the Bible. Funny how when I really stormed the gates of heaven (fervent prayer) mine got answered. Jesus said in Matthew 13 the "violent take it by force." I think you and Dawkins could care less about finding out if God really exists since we have a world full of people who took the kingdom by force, and found a gracious God.Pity.Since your livelyhoods are wrapped up in evolution, writing books titled "The God Delusion" becomes a necessity to "explain" what you chose to reject by lackadaisical effort.RayEdited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.

Do you recall what he said about "delusion" since I do not have the book handy?My point with Crashfrog was that his contention of emulating persons around him (his reason for temporarily accepting God) is not the definition or cause of a delusion. A delusion targets the mind, while we all are impressionable (to varying degrees), delusion is not talking about this. Delusion is something much different. In fact, I would say that a delusion is something more conducive as originating from a Deity. In other words, the delusion is operating on persons who reject the existence of God instead of on persons who accept Deity existence. Dawkins got it backwards, unless, of course, you can tell me the power source of Dawkins delusion contention that believers are under the delusion instead of nonbelievers?I could be wrong but let me speculate: Dawkins did not explain adequately what he meant by delusion; its definition, source and cause: my "delusion term is a red herring" stands.However, in Blind Watchmaker (1986) Dawkins says design is an illusion caused by natural selection. Did Dawkins say that natural selection or powers causes the delusion?Ray

My first statement above does not say that religion is a delusion. It goes on to say that the delusion being suffered is by persons who do not accept Deity existence.What you cannot grasp or seem to understand is that IF we are talking about a real delusion THEN it is more plausible to say that said delusion originates from Deity and targets nonbelievers in making them think or believe that He does not exist. In fact, I have a very respectable source for my view: In context, "unrighteousness" is talking about the rejection of the Gospel or way of faith to relate to God. It is not talking about adherence to a code of conduct (Mosaic Law).So we see that this is how God operates: He sends a strong delusion so that those who have scorned Him will remain in that state as a punishment for scorning Him.The "God delusion" is upon you and Dawkins.Ray

That would be the God of St. Paul. Same answer.How could both of you guys miss the answer that was clearly posted in the message replied to?RayEdited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.