Does richard dawkins believe in god, but is concerned that god dosn't believe in him?

Question

The god delusion seems to be an attack on god by a jealous lover, who sets out using science, to prove that god is a lie

Is this a threat being carried out because god won't talk to him

there may be a god
it is religeon that is false

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”
“That depends a good deal on where you want to
get to,” said the Cat.
“I don’t much care where — ” said Alice.
“Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,” said the Cat.”
" — so long as I get somewhere,” Alice added as an explanation.
“Oh, you’re sure to do that,” said the Cat, “if you only walk long enough.”

- Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland


please forgive my grammer, that is not the point

I do research some of the answers, and I enjoy most of them

I found the poem in a link from pantheism

Answer 1

Dawkins' argument is sound if you stick to purely "objective" rules for truth. It's not so sound if you step outside a strictly materialist framework, which you absolutely must do if you want to address all of human experience and truth. I think those such as Dawkins, who seem more eager to refine the (highly obvious and already complete) atheist logic than to understand ways in which it would not work, simply seem afraid to deal with their own lack of "objective" knowledge and truth in every area... they're kind of like insecure know-it-alls, to put it in harsher terms than I really need.

I think it's good in general that we have such people, though, because they are the ones who can advance good science -- and science, as many scientists have pointed out, in its own way is yet another path to "god." If one's belief in god is threatened enough by Dawkins' argument that one has to accuse him of behaving like 'a jealous lover,' one is probably not completely secure in one's own knowledge of god. I hope you will take that as food for thought rather than taking offense.

Answer 2

Have you read the book? Or are you just talking out of the side of your neck? He made it painfully clear that he was talking about the Theistic God(s)

You said: there may be a god it is religion that is false.
Your talking about the Deist God. The man devoted like 3 chapters to make it painfully obvious that The God delusion is in reference to theistic Gods.

Plus you statements are incoherent and don`t make much sense. Deist don`t believe that God talks to them. They believe that he has no contact with them whatsoever in any way, shape, form or fashion. So to say is he mad because God won`t talk to him - then proclaim there may be a god but religion is false - is an oxymoron! Your mixing postulates between theism and deism.

Answer 3

Darwin and Dawkins didn't realize the transcendence of their discoveries.
They discovered that the Creation is still happening through a process for the living creatures they called Evolution.
Evolution is applicable to any kind of order dynamically emerging from the original chaos, not just for living beings.

Answer 4

No chance but I would be delighted if he put his expertise to drawing an atheistic set of morality some kind of statement on the paradigm of atheism if possible . After all as religion continues to wane eventually it won't be around enough to carry the weight of morality for society.
he quite honest and smart enough with it to see the facts and come as close to the truth as they allow.

Answer 5

Notice that you use the word "seems" in your first sentence. The person to whom it "seems" is you.

You have a set of beliefs that are contrary to those of Mr. Dawkins, and are projecting your beliefs onto him.

That's the source of the "seeming."

Keep reading.

I am always struck by the strangeness of the notion that some people seem to have developed that grammar does not matter. Since we think with language, and grammar is the process by which language is organized, it matters very much, indeed.

Answer 6

Oh please, don't treat him like he's some god penis-envyer. He uses science and rationality to show how flimsy the whole idea of a god is, not that I would expect you to be able to comprehend someone who actually uses critical thinking...

Answer 7

You're barely intelligible, but you seem to be unable to accept that someone else doesn't share your beliefs without making up some sort of bizarre, theistic-pseudo-psychological explanation for it.

Answer 8

He looked like he believed in God on Family Feud.

Answer 9

Yeah maybe it's your spelling that's false.
I can spot church folks' questions a mile away, just by looking at the spelling.

Answer 10

No.

Your talents as a reviewer of literature are dismal at best. If you read the book, you clearly missed the point. Have another look. And have another look at your self-contradicting question.

And people, proper names, are capitalized. Just so know.