It seems Richard Dawkins isnt a proper Atheist-guru !

[CallMeDave]

One has to wonder if an atheistic worldview would be better represented by someone other than the not-so conventional-'atheist' Prof. Richard Dawkins. Heres the latest newsflash on him :



"Richard Dawkins says he’s not entirely sure God doesn’t exist
- Washington Post 28th Feb 2012

"LONDON — A controversial Oxford University professor billed
by many as the world’s “most famous atheist” now says he is
not 100 percent sure that God doesn’t exist — but just barely."


Dawkin's is confused and contradictory .


"It’s very important to understand that these Gods
came into being "
- Richard Dawkins


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science /20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all


"In a 100-minute debate with Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan
Williams on Thursday (Feb. 23), Richard Dawkins surprised
his online and theater audiences by conceding a personal
chink of doubt about his conviction that there is no such
thing as a creator
" .

[wrain62]

I have to admit respect even when he was an atheist he is very consistent in being honest with what he feels. When he is in one mood you always know what to expect, but blessing onto him for not being a hard heart and admiting what he feels about God. Of course it may just be nothing in the end. Time will tell.

[CallMeDave]

I have to admit respect even when he was an atheist he is very consistent in being honest with what he feels. When he is in one mood you always know what to expect, but blessing onto him for not being a hard heart and admiting what he feels about God. Of course it may just be nothing in the end. Time will tell.

Heres a very interesting clip showing how un-atheistic he really is : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKpAZHrpD2k . A person of his atheistic notoriety should be the poster boy for good ol fashioned atheistic Naturalism and Materialism for a worldview ; but this interview shows completely otherwise . Maybe one day He like famous philosopher Anthony Flew , will take a fall from atheistic grace (?) .

[Stu]

Here's the video clip in which Dawkins reveals his agnosticism

Richard Dawkins' Roll of the Dice

[Canuckster1127]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

[CallMeDave]

Here's the video clip in which Dawkins reveals his agnosticism

Richard Dawkins' Roll of the Dice

This clip sums up for me, that, there really arent ANY true atheists out there ; no ones got that much faith that Nothing produced the Universe from nothing by nothing , or, that a totally accidental and unpurposed 'pond protozoan' worked its way up to a human brain capable as Carl Sagan would say , storing enough information as found in 20,000,000 books. Im just sorry i believed the charade for so long and trusted my school teachers with evolutionary material. By comparison to late atheist Christopher Hitchens, Dawkins is just a tad wishy washy...certainly not someone who holds to the conventional atheistic worldview any longer. It is akin to Billy Graham giving homage to the One celled Pond Protozoa as our great ancestor .

[Dallas]

I bet when he's about to die (Lord willing not soon), he's going to believe in Christ, like everyone else. It's so selfish.

[narnia4]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

Yep. I know some people want to dive in on stuff like this, but I wouldn't. If anything, I think Dawkins would just be trying to show how "honest and forthright" he is. Even if he changed his mind about some things, he has a huge following and is going to try not to embarrass himself.

There's a lesson I think many Christians should learn, and I include myself as much as anybody. That lesson being, we should care more about souls than politics. How much do I actually care about Dawkins' soul, or do I just want to see him embarrassed (and if you know serious philosophy, it isn't hard to see that he should be embarrassed)?

There's so much confusion going around about how to define someone being an atheist, that's where quite a bit of this stuff stems for. Pretty silly imo, and again its mostly political to try to "win" arguments. For the new atheist crowd, the only reason many don't hold to a stronger position is because they want to get away without sharing any burden of proof so that they can have an easy way to claim victory in debates/arguments.

[CallMeDave]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

.............

There's a lesson I think many Christians should learn, and I include myself as much as anybody. That lesson being, we should care more about souls than politics. How much do I actually care about Dawkins' soul, or do I just want to see him embarrassed (and if you know serious philosophy, it isn't hard to see that he should be embarrassed)?

...........

I think its a concerning subject because Dawkins has quite a large consituency who are trusting in his credentials and are staking their (lack of) eternity on it ; thus, his Soul and the Soul of others are at stake . Its far more than just politics as usual , or wanting to see him embarrass himself . I would hope that his constituents would be awakened at his unsure atheistic-worldview stand as of late, and therefore reduce their trust in him .

[jlay]

I could have sworn I heard Dawkins say something similar a few years ago.

[CallMeDave]

I could have sworn I heard Dawkins say something similar a few years ago.

He did with Ben Stein, Interviewer . Dawkins reported their IS intelligent design .

[Stu]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

So does that mean New Atheism is dead?

You know what the problem is -- it was much easier to be an atheist during the 70's, 80's and perhaps early 90's.
What we have learned since 2000 makes it extremely difficult to rule out God, and would take a huge leap of faith, and quite frankly a healthy dose of illogic given all the advances in the field of cosmology.

Not sure who Daekins is though..

[Ivellious]

Ummm...What's the big deal here? So Dawkins admits what pretty much every reasonable person in his situation would. Even atheists can't be certain about their belief 100%, because you cannot disprove God. Simple as that. Most Christians I know would have the same reaction...They certainly believe in Jesus as their savior, but at the same time you cannot prove God, so there is no 100%.

Not knowing isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign of natural human curiosity and a good job of always questioning.

[CallMeDave]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

So does that mean New Atheism is dead?

You know what the problem is -- it was much easier to be an atheist during the 70's, 80's and perhaps early 90's.
What we have learned since 2000 makes it extremely difficult to rule out God, and would take a huge leap of faith, and quite frankly a healthy dose of illogic given all the advances in the field of cosmology.

Not sure who Daekins is though..

You nailed it. With todays scientific discoveries and technology....modern science is definetly pointing toward a personal theistic Creator and further away from accidental materialism and naturalism. When Scientists determined that there WAS a beginning to the Universe instead of being eternal, it essentially put a final nail in the atheist coffin. Now, you have to believe that Nothing produced something as razor edge precise as our cosmos is...and by nothing from nothing. That the personal came from planets, gas, and material. It has made conventional atheism of the 1970-1990's completely illogical.

Richard Dawkins is the atheists Guru...an Evolutionary Zoologist whos written a few books and has gone on the debate circuit except he refuses to debate very seasoned Apologists like Dr. William Lane Craig or Dr. Norman Geisler . He would be torn to shreds if he did.

[CallMeDave]

Nothing new here. Daekins says the same thing in his book the God Delusion. It's nothing new.

So does that mean New Atheism is dead?

You know what the problem is -- it was much easier to be an atheist during the 70's, 80's and perhaps early 90's.
What we have learned since 2000 makes it extremely difficult to rule out God, and would take a huge leap of faith, and quite frankly a healthy dose of illogic given all the advances in the field of cosmology.

Not sure who Daekins is though..

You nailed it. With todays scientific discoveries and technology....modern science is definetly pointing toward a personal theistic Creator and further away from accidental materialism and naturalism. When Scientists determined that there WAS a beginning to the Universe instead of being eternal, it essentially put a final nail in the atheist coffin. Now, you have to believe that Nothing produced something as razor edge precise as our cosmos is...and by nothing from nothing. That the personal came from planets, gas, and material. It has made conventional atheism of the 1970-1990's completely illogical. Not only does atheism have to borrow from the theistic worldview to make their point quasi-credible since things like logic, reason, etc.. can only exist in a theistic universe

Richard Dawkins is the atheists Guru...an Evolutionary Zoologist whos written a few books and has gone on the debate circuit except he refuses to debate very seasoned Apologists like Dr. William Lane Craig or Dr. Norman Geisler . He would be torn to shreds if he did.