It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Richard Dawkins: I can't be sure God does not exist

page: 7
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonders

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
The rational approach would be to accept that we can never be 100% certain - though i've yet to find a practising Christian who would even entertain the notion or remote possibility that there may not be a god....
Shrugging your shoulders is the height of intelligence eh? I don't think so. I AM 100% certain that God is real. I have no desire whatsoever to prove anything to anyone and I don't care who isn't satisfied, people ought to seek their beliefs rather than be spoon fed by money hungry preachers priests and pastors.


The way it should be. Personally I don't want to be saved by any god who has chosen you to be the personal messenger of theirs, and can instruct me how I should live my life.




posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by reaxi0n

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by reaxi0n
Technically speaking I think everyone should be agnostic, as no one can be 100% sure of anything.


Everyone is Agnostic - - whether they want to admit it or not.

Every Atheist is an Agnostic Atheist. Because logically and scientifically - - - god can not be proven or dis-proven.

Its a straight forward logical answer.

No surprise.


I guess what I meant to say is everyone should admit they are agnostic instead of being stuck in the "absolute" sides of the spectrum.


Your argument makes no logical sense. If we conclude that everyone is Agnostic, surely the word loses all meaning and there's no point to label ourselves as such.

If we're all agnostic atheists or agnostic theists then what's the point of the agnostic part? Theism and Atheism are the only words in either that matter.

Agnosticism is a redundant term



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
He's just chickening out of his stance on the issue because he's getting old and wants to make sure he can get his free pass to "heaven" by saying he isn't entirely sure he is probably saying to god "oh sorry I kind of believe now"



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder

Richard Dawkins: I can't be sure God does not exist


www.telegraph.co.uk

He is regarded as the most famous atheist in the world but last night Professor Richard Dawkins admitted he could not be sure that God does not exist.

There was surprise when Prof Dawkins acknowledged that he was less than 100 per cent certain of his conviction that there is no creator. An incredulous Sir Anthony replied: “You are described as the world’s most famous atheist.” Prof Dawkins said that he was “6.9 out of seven” sure of his beliefs.
(visit the link for the full news article)

I don't know why that's so funny...



edit on 24-2-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit to add quote



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by VerityPhantom
 



He's just chickening out of his stance on the issue because he's getting old and wants to make sure he can get his free pass to "heaven" by saying he isn't entirely sure he is probably saying to god "oh sorry I kind of believe now"


I don't recall there being any clause about letting those who are "unsure" into Paradise, at least not in the Christian faith. In the Bible, it's pretty clear that one needs to accept Jesus as their savior, before getting to the doorman. So, no pass there for agnostics.

Most religions are very "my way or the highway (to Hell)". For one thing, if this was so, then the majority of the world would be doomed, just for their beliefs (as millions are of many different faiths, billions even), mostly due to how (and where) they were raised, not by their actions. I don't know about you, but I could never revere a deity who would do such a thing.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   
God must be real cause this one time i was like please GOD let my mom get me a Super Nintendo for my birthday and then the next day on my birthday there it was ....



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
This has always been Dawkins' position. This is nothing new. He has also stated that he cannot be 100% certain that Santa Claus does not exist.


I have no idea of Santa but the tooth fairy phenomenon IS real.
I have no proof that would impossible to argue against but if you had the same experiences then I had, you would know it to be true.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by reaxi0n
 


I am not wrong, simples. Just because you cannot see something does not make it exist. Just because you do not have proof of something does not make it non-existent either. You must accept those facts.


Just because you believe something exists, doesn't mean it does.

You must accept that fact.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
While I love the WHOLE interview.. skip to just about 0:56 in for the relevant bit.. Dawkins in his own words..

This interview is new by the way.. February 4, 2012

Watch from 0:56 on for about 10-15 minutes .. but if you got the time, you should watch the whole 2 hours .. at the 1 hour point it's especially relevant .. dawkins SPECIFICALLY talks about this at 1:01


edit on 2/24/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
It is very progressive, IMHO, that he admits he doesn't know 100%. No one can. No matter what, we are all agnostics, whether we have the courage to admit it or not. Since 'God' by his/her/its very nature is too large of a concept to grasp, and therefore, unknowable, we are mostly only trying to prove our idea (or false image/idol) of God when we do try to 'prove' the existence. Kudos to Mr. Dawkins for his courage and honesty on this matter.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Perhaps Richard Dawkins,being an academic has heard through the grapevine that CERN scientists are coming to the realization that Higgs Bosun, The God particle is in fact ... GOD.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by eatbliss
It is very progressive, IMHO, that he admits he doesn't know 100%. No one can. No matter what, we are all agnostics, whether we have the courage to admit it or not. Since 'God' by his/her/its very nature is too large of a concept to grasp, and therefore, unknowable, we are mostly only trying to prove our idea (or false image/idol) of God when we do try to 'prove' the existence. Kudos to Mr. Dawkins for his courage and honesty on this matter.


It's not at all progressive.. it's just the way a true scientist thinks..



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by kennyb72
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Perhaps Richard Dawkins,being an academic has heard through the grapevine that CERN scientists are coming to the realization that Higgs Bosun, The God particle is in fact ... GOD.


See the video above... simply put, no ..
at 1:01 Dawkins addresses this very thing..



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xieon

Originally posted by Wonders

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
The rational approach would be to accept that we can never be 100% certain - though i've yet to find a practising Christian who would even entertain the notion or remote possibility that there may not be a god....
Shrugging your shoulders is the height of intelligence eh? I don't think so. I AM 100% certain that God is real. I have no desire whatsoever to prove anything to anyone and I don't care who isn't satisfied, people ought to seek their beliefs rather than be spoon fed by money hungry preachers priests and pastors.


The way it should be. Personally I don't want to be saved by any god who has chosen you to be the personal messenger of theirs, and can instruct me how I should live my life.

"Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy; and let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness; and the one who is holy, still keep himself holy." Revelation 22:11



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
I use to be hard line atheist. But about a year ago I started to read religious scriptures from Budhism and Kabalah and I found them to be truly based on a. Knowledge system rather than on a faith based system. I have come to my personal conclusion that we know about 1 percent of the information of our reality. And no book or men can fully say what is the meaning of life. The truth is that our reality is more wild and amazing than what any scientist or any religious. Person can imagine



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dron020
I use to be hard line atheist. But about a year ago I started to read religious scriptures from Budhism and Kabalah and I found them to be truly based on a. Knowledge system rather than on a faith based system. I have come to my personal conclusion that we know about 1 percent of the information of our reality. And no book or men can fully say what is the meaning of life. The truth is that our reality is more wild and amazing than what any scientist or any religious. Person can imagine


I am attracted to the budhist doctrine.. but I am still an atheist, if I had to pick a region however, it would be that.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Spirituality and science will merge to form a new system of knowledge. Along with technology we have such an amazing future, it is sad that most people can't understand how much poteintial humanity has



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
God (with or without the capital g) is a loaded term. It's semantically weighted and culturally dependent. Creator can also be that way, but only with a capital c.

I don't think being atheist and willing to believe in a creative motivation or force are mutually exclusive.

I personally think that all of the world's religions are in part correct and in part flawed and I don't think you can take any thing any of them say at face value, but that doesn't mean that I don't believe that in this massive existence that we inhabit there aren't things we don't get (and probably never will).



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by dron020
I use to be hard line atheist. But about a year ago I started to read religious scriptures from Budhism and Kabalah and I found them to be truly based on a. Knowledge system rather than on a faith based system. I have come to my personal conclusion that we know about 1 percent of the information of our reality. And no book or men can fully say what is the meaning of life. The truth is that our reality is more wild and amazing than what any scientist or any religious. Person can imagine


I am attracted to the budhist doctrine.. but I am still an atheist, if I had to pick a region however, it would be that.
Budshm is a philosophy on how men can control his cycles of emotions. And how mens purpose in this exestince is to find Enlightment. Since we mostly function in this reality with in our mind Budhsm does not even approach the idea of the universal mind to which some culture call God. I do think that you will find no conflicts in Budhsim



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I wonder if there is a significance in his saying "6.9 out of 7" sure rather than 9.9 out of 10 or 99%. Why out of 7?



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join