God Delusion?

Question

I have just finished reading the God Delusion by Dawkins. I find its tenets very plausible. I was a Christian theistic evolutionist before, and so most of his claims about evolutionary theory were not earth shattering. The most damaging statements to the Christian faith are the critiques of the scriptures, and I think it is hard for me to accept Old Testament law as a loving God’s best hopes for humanity. It seems quite cold and even cruel at times. I think if my faith were only in the bible’s inerrancy, or the ability philosophy to “prove” God’s existence, or science ability to reveal the complete nature of reality I would have left it years ago. However, I have had powerful experiences of “God moving.” I have seen a lady whose cancer disappear after a prayer session. Another was cured of diabetes. I have seen my wife’s back healed. Even after reading Dawkins stuff on the psychology of religion I still feel that those events to are best explained as “Acts of God.”

I want truth regardless of the personal consequences, but I am finding it is much more difficult to let the facts speak for themselves, because they are saying different things. I do not want disregard good science and philosophy and commit intellectual suicide but can I disregard my personal experience because it would be intellectual suicide as well. I really don’t know where to go from here. Thoughts? Suggestions? Anyone out there in the same situation?

Answer 1

The one fundamental problem with your personal experience is, though it might be edifying, it is in no way admissible for a debate such as this one. Personal experiences, after all, can attest to a whole host of absurdities. Everything from the belief in the patheon of Hindu gods and goddesses, to the belief in abandoned Gods of old (think Zeus, Gia, and Mythra) have been justified by one person or another on the basis of personal miraculous occurrences that seem to transpire when one is communing with them through prayer or some equivalent mystical interaction.

Yet, do you believe in these gods, which are diametrically contradictory to your own God? I don’t think you do. I do not doubt your sincerity in the slightest. However, you can see the problems we fall into if we use personal experience as “evidence” as to the truth or falsehood of a matter. In every other realm where the ascertainment of truth is paramount, such is in science or the court of law, independent verification of a asserted fact is essential to concluding whether something is true or not. In a court of law, we don’t pass down a verdict based solely on the experience of the accuser. We look to an independent witness, DNA evidence, camera footage, etc. In scientific pursuits, we don’t claim something is true just because the proponent of the theory in question experienced it himself. We require independent verification from scientific peers. The theory must be replicated for it to be considered valid.

Finally, it is somewhat presumptions to claim that God is behind many of these miraculous cures that you experienced, when you cannot rule out, unequivocally, alternate scenarios. Cancers have been known to go into spontaneous remission without prayer or treatment, and much research is being done on the power of the mind to mend a broken body through its own power. One should not be so quick to chalk up every inexplicable fact to a God, however comforting the notion is. Really think about it. Millions of prayers are said earnestly to God for men and women in dire health. If such a high percentage were answered by God, as one would expect from an omnipotent and completely benevolent creature, what need would there be for hospitals. If God did address human illness that those close to you experienced, he is very selective, and highly ineffective.

As a famous philosopher, whose name I don’t recall, once said about the efficacy of religious belief [paraphrased]: “Europe would have been better off during the Great Plague if it had one doctor and proper sanitation instead of its numerous priests and their ineffectual prayers”.

Answer 2

I am an agnostic, and I appreciate the intelligent, well thought out nature of your post. I respect "personal experiences of God" much more than I respect arguments based on the Bible or pure reason.

I don't see strange, unexplained phenomena as "acts of God." I see them as just unexplained. Who knows why someone suddenly gets cured of diabetes or cancer? Is it a miracle? Well, how come I never see really extreme "miracles" like someone growing a new limb? The miracles I hear about are relatively subtle, to tell you the truth. Also, the power of suggestion can be very powerful. In every medical study, researchers are forced to give some patients a placebo (such as a sugar pill) in addition to other patients getting the real treatment in order to account for the power of suggestion when people get better.

To skeptics, the idea of God is a catch-all for the unexplained and tends to shut the brain off to the possibility of exploring further, and trying to find further explanations. It's a (intellectual) dead-end. But if you somehow simply feel/intuitively think that God is real, arguments need not sway you.

Answer 3

I have read many of Dawkin's books and liked most of them. But in the God Delusion he seems to have left the scientific reservation and landed up in theology's back yard. He comes into the yard with no knowledge of the philosophical arguments needed to play with other theologians. Instead in his latest book he offers up nothing new, only the same rhetoric you would find, say in this forum. I would have expected a man of Dawkin's stature to have spent some time studying philosophy and logic before writing a book that seems to resemble the same high school debates on religion vs. atheism that I experienced 30 years ago!

I urge you review what other minds have to say about Dawkin's arguments. One of the best critiques of the God Delusion is at the link below. Dr. McGrath's lecture is reasoned and rational, two things that Dawkins leaves behind at the opening flap of his book and never looks back. Furthermore, Dr. McGrath's lecture is a model of the type of discussions I had hoped to find in the Yahoo R&S Forum: logical, cogent, articulate, recognizing the good and flawed points of a position, all while making reasoned arguments to support a personal worldview.

I encourage anyone, believer or not, to review the lecture in the link below, if for nothing else just to imagine what is possible for Yahoo R&S.

Answer 4

I know that I'm not being a "good little atheist" by saying this, but I see no reason why you must stop believing in the Christian god. You have personal experience which leads you to the conclusion that a deity does, in fact, exist. Your faith in a deity is, therefore, based upon the principle of personal experience--which in most circles is perfectly valid.

My suggestion is to continue searching and reading, researching everything you can, and to continue praying to your god as long as you feel it beneficial. You will eventually reach a point where your intellectual learning will balance with your personal experience--what you will believe or not believe at that time, I don't know. I ended with agnostic atheism; you may end with a liberal Christianity. Be true to yourself and not dogma, and you will be fine.

Answer 5

Read "The Seat of the Soul" by Gary Zukav

Answer 6

The Bible is a religious, philosophical, free will testiment and it is up to US to weed out what it means on an individual basis.

Dawkins is GREAT until you get to the point where SCIENCE is the entity responsible for the A-Bomb and then Dawkins and his atheist friends do a segue, just like they do with Atheist USSR and Atheist Red China and Atheist Cuba.

Religious people don't do a dance to get out of the ills of their own situation.

But WATCH atheists do a DANCE to get out of THEIR ills.

Remember, Catholics, Proestants, Jews, Muslims HAD NOTHING TO DO with the A-Bomb.

That was PURE SCIENCE and GOVERNMENT

Don't give me Oppenheimer was a Jew, yeah he was, but he was more a SCIENTIST than a JEW and he FEARED HITLER who hated JEWS would get the bomb FIRST.

If Oppenheimer told his Rabbi what he was doing and that Rabbi was truly religious he would have and should have told Oppenheimer to QUIT his job!

Mass destruction is NOT a good occupation for a nice Jewish boy!

WHAT religion would ADVOCATE making an A-Bomb! And then USING IT!

Answer 7

Let me see if I understand this . . . You have personal evidence of god working in your life and you are questioning this because of something someone wrote in a book? So you are willing to disregard your own experience because someone who you have never met says so??! In the face of your experience what makes you think that either the Bible or Dawkins is right? Are you truly that insecure?

If this is true I can't help you. "There are none so blind as those who will not see."

Answer 8

Some people beat the odds, think of how many remain sick or die after prayer.

Answer 9

just back off for awhile and God will guide you to the truth later. i believe we sometimes want to know everything, thinking that will make us happy. that is legalism.

Answer 10

Are you listening to the voice of your good shepherd? He said that his sheep will not listen to the voice of another. You don't have to receive the philosophy of the world.