The God Delusion

In truth we are all delusional. Our God(s) are made in the image of Man.

From Wikipedia:

The God Delusion is a 2006 book by British biologist Richard Dawkins, holder of the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford.

In The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that belief in a god qualifies as a delusion, which he defines as a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence. He is sympathetic to Robert Pirsig‘s observation in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance that “when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.”

Now I don’t subscribe to Dawkins’ philosophy. None of his evidence addresses the root cause of Life. It only provides a basis for a scientifically understandable methodology for the progression of life. A lack of evidence is not reason for dismissal, only flatly contradictory evidence would be so.

I will say though that all of our Gods are delusions. They are solely the constructs of Man.

Now please don’t get me wrong, I do not deny the existence of a god-head. I deny Man’s understanding of it. I believe that Man cannot – not in any meaningful way – understand the divine. We see the God(s) through the lenses of our own inadequacy.

All of our holy books and oral histories have been passed down through so many translations and edits that they no longer carry the unabridged Word. Worse, all of these strictures have been interpreted and reinterpreted in the light of Man’s understanding and conceit.

There are 6 billion of us, each with our God(s) created in our minds to help us strive towards understanding some fraction of the God(s)’ true nature and mind. I find this a delusion that is worth perpetuating. 😉

I have my faith, but I accept that I know only the most infinitesimal fraction of the nature of my Gods. I know only what they chose to reveal and that only through the lens of my own imperfect understanding.

Tags: | |

53 Responses to “The God Delusion”

  1. Christy Says:

    Now I dont subscribe to Dawkins philosophy. None of his evidence addresses the root cause of Life. It only provides a basis for a scientifically understandable methodology for the progression of life. A lack of evidence is not reason for dismissal, only flatly contradictory evidence would be so.

    Curious to know if you have seen Expelled, Ben Steins movie in which Dawkins features.

  2. jonolan Says:

    I haven’t seen it yet. From what I’ve heard it was little more than a commercial enterprise designed to capitalize on the current “debate.” I’ll probably get around to watching on DVD sometime though.

  3. Ricky Says:

    This was an interesting post. I agree with you that we only know a minuscule fraction of God and what he/it is. We will never get close to understanding the divine. It’s impossible. And it’s impossible for Dawkins to declare there is no god, because he is not God and does not know all. This is why I believe God exists; he has to. Although I cannot prove the existence of God, I have experienced his work in my life, and believe he exists.

    I’m interested to know what your faith is, or where you base your faith.

    Great post!

  4. jonolan Says:

    Ricky,

    It’s easiest to describe my faith as Wicca. That’s not an exact representation, but it the closest “mass market” religion to my beliefs.

  5. Christy Says:

    Ill be curious to know your assessment of it if/when you view it. =)

  6. Ricky Says:

    Interesting. I admit I don’t know much about Wiccan beliefs or the different variations. I’ve always heard they worship Satan, but I don’t think that’s necessarily or always true. From my perspective, as a Christian (I don’t like that term but it works), I worship or give place to Satan each time I give into my fleshly desires that contradict the Bible or God’s direction.

    I liked this post because you bring up the truth that we will never comprehend the divine, yet it doesn’t mean that the divine doesn’t exist.

  7. jonolan Says:

    The thought that Wiccans worship Lucifer-Satan-Shaitan-Samael-Yblis is a very common misconception among Christians. In truth he has no place in our theology at all; we don’t believe in him at all. Wicca actually doesn’t include a polarized Good v. Evil divine war.

    Now, if one subscribes to the Abrahamic faiths, it is plausible – as an article of faith – to conclude that Wiccans have been duped by “The Evil One” into false worship. I’m not sure though that even that would be the same as worshiping Satan though. I think of worship as an overt act into which you really can’t be tricked.

  8. Ricky Says:

    I would agree with you on your point about worship, and from my understanding after reading the Bible is that true worshipers will worship God in spirit and in truth. Consequently, in order to worship (God or whoever you choose) it has to be an act of the will. True worship of a deity stems from belief and faith that the deity will respond to you in some way.

  9. The Razzler Says:

    I agree that we will never understand the divine. This subject fascinates me – thanks Jonolan!

    I learn new things about God every day. A tiny new glimpse into His nature. So tiny.

    Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
    How unsearchable his judgments,
    and his paths beyond tracing out!
    “Who has known the mind of the Lord?
    Or who has been his counselor?”
    Romans 11:33-34

    I don’t believe that in this life we will ever understand the nature of God. But I will spend the rest of this life searching.

    And I believe that although our human nature can’t understand the divine, God can and does give His spirit to us, to help us understand. To give us glimpses of Himself. To open our minds and help us to see beyond our earthly limitations.

  10. Moriah Says:

    Well said, Razzler.
    ;p Couldnt have said it better myself.
    I second my thanks, Jonolan.
    Post-college, its rare to find, in the day to day drive of life, others with whom to engage and exchange ideas and thoughts and your blog consistently feeds that part of my soul that needs to process, question, wrestle and examine. Thanks!

  11. jonolan Says:

    Ricky,

    “True worship of a deity stems from belief and faith that the deity will respond to you in some way” is a very, very insightful comment. I was all set to argue the point based on Man’s duty to the God(s), but then realized that even propitiation is done the expectation of a response.

    Razzler,

    Thank you for Romans 11:33-34. I wanted to use that passage but couldn’t remember it. It’s been too long since I studied under Jesuits I guess.

    Christy,

    I aim to please – or rather incite and provoke. 😉

  12. Jonathan Says:

    Jonolan,

    I hate to keep saying “But from the Christian world-view” but from the Christian world-view God reveals himself and has created man with perspective, thought categories, language, etc. specifically to receive His revelation. The dilemma you speak of is often given in the analogy of sunlight and stain glass windows of various colors. The sunlight is God’s revelation and the stain glass windows of various colors are man’s cognitive faculties et al. As God reveals Himself his revelation is twisted and changed by the windows. What this fails to take account of, in the Christian worldview, is that God created the windows and created them to receive his revelation. The colors reflected in Scripture were ordained by God to communicate His message with all perspicuity.

    I didn’t read the other replies under this topic so I apologize if I’m merely repeating something that has been addressed.

  13. Ricky Says:

    Jonolan,

    While I worship and believe whole-heartedly in the Judeo-Christian god, I look around me and see others who worship other gods or entities. I see the ones who are sincere in their devotion to whoever they worship, and though I will personally disagree with them on their choice on whom to worship, I admit that I am very jealous of their devotion. It challenges me to make sure my faith is genuine, and I’m not just worshiping for the sake of worshiping. It’s a daily battle over fitting in or truly worshiping God.

  14. jonolan Says:

    Ricky.

    Don’t feel bad. Faith – IMRHO – should be challenged constantly. That is the only road to growth I know of for faith. I think that no matter what your theology is our job is to grow our faith and our understanding of our God(s) will.

    Jonathan,

    You’re a Christian – and one who sees these things from a Christian’s viewpoint – there is NO problem there. Never ever apologize for your faith! LOL Let’s not lend credence to the “political correctness” that favors the secularists.

    I’m not seeing o contradiction between the light & stained glass comment and my assertion of our lack of understanding. Am I missing something in what you’re trying to say?

  15. Ricky Says:

    Haha, thanks Jonolan. Sorry if it sounded depressing, I meant it in a positive mood, but your reply still makes perfect sense. So thanks.

  16. Moriah Says:

    Christy,

    I aim to please – or rather incite and provoke. 😉

    Ain’t that the truth!
    😉

  17. kiss the brand new day « without condition Says:

    […] friend, Jonolan, posted this bit…it gets into a little about our ideas of God…who He is, what He looks […]

  18. expatbrian Says:

    I do agree with Dawkins. I don’t buy the existence of a spiritual or supreme being or Godhead whether we understand it or not. Nor do I agree with the argument that, because scientific evidence has not (yet) uncovered the mystery of the spark of life itself, it must be supernatural.

    Over the centuries, so many beliefs have been cast off as our knowledge progresses, and this will simply be one of those. But believers won’t go down without a long, drawn out fight – no matter what the evidence.

  19. Ricky Says:

    Brian,

    How can you believe what you believe, while you are unable to provide evidence against a “spiritual or supreme being or Godhead” ?

    Finite, and fallible beings such as ourselves as humans cannot prove nor disprove the idea/existence of “God.” Though I can and will always believe in the Judeo-Christian God, because of clear evidences of His work in my life, I cannot prove nor disprove Him. Do you kind of follow my logic here?

  20. jonolan Says:

    Brian,

    That science hasn’t – and may never – uncovered the reason for life existing does NOT mean that the cause is supernatural. It just doesn’t prove that it ISN’T either. That matter is still in open.

  21. expatbrian Says:

    Jonolan, I think you missed my point. I said exactly the same thing. To assume a supernatural power of any kind must be responsible simply because our science has not yet evolved to the point where it can prove otherwise is not the least bit reasonable.
    Ricky, I don’t feel the need, nor do I feel I have to prove the existence of an invisible, supernatural power. The burden of proof is on the believer, not the skeptic. There is ample evidence that life in a mutitude of forms existed before man and did for millions of years and the bible just doesn’t account for that. Most people in the world are not Christians and they are not just backward, 3rd world natives who don’t know any better.

  22. Ricky Says:

    Brian,

    The Bible accounts for the creation of all animals. What more do you need? Your only quarrel with the Biblical account of creation from what I can tell is that it claims God did it all, and it didn’t happen million of years ago.

    Almost half of the world’s population is Christian in name. Almost half. That’s quite a number.

  23. jonolan Says:

    Brian,

    I believe that categorically denying the God(s) when science has not evolved to the point where it can disprove their existence is equally unreasonable. Both sides of this issue are arguing faith, not science and faith, by definition, isn’t coldly reasonable. I suppose that, if we were all to be coldly reasonable and logical, we’d all have to agnostic. We just don’t know the answer.

  24. HannahJ Says:

    Jonolan, based on some of your responses to comments on this post, I’m curious as to whether you believe that there is an absolute moral code. Certain posts make it sound like you’re a relativist. Just wondering.

    Signed,
    A relatively intolerant, but always curious, moral absolutist

  25. jonolan Says:

    I’m not relativist. I guess you could call me a “motivationalist” I find more moral weight in one’s desires and goals than in the details and empirical outcomes of one’s actions on the mortal world.

    I most definitely believe that there is an absolute moral code. Accepting that we can’t prove or disprove that the God(s) exist doesn’t preclude the belief in Right and Wrong.

  26. expatbrian Says:

    Ricky, firstly the bible does not account for ALL creatures and you know that. Secondly, it accounts for creatures AFTER man, not before. And lastly, you can alter that stats by using the phrase “Christian name” if you want to but the fact is that 2/3 of the world are not Christian. There are roughly 2.1 billion Christians.

  27. The Razzler Says:

    Actually, according to the Bible, animals came before humans, not the other way around. 😉

  28. Ricky Says:

    Brian,

    I agree with the Razzler, in the fact that animals did come before man. Just follow the chronological order. Man was created on the sixth day.

    Secondly, where is your Scriptural proof for Creation not accounting for all creatures?

  29. expatbrian Says:

    Scriptural Proof? Are you seriously saying that the only resource that is valid to show that there was a whole world of creatures that these early authors were not aware of (there are still multitudes of species that we haven’t even yet come across) is the Bible?

    Sorry, I don’t use that book as proof of anything. I do find that many Christians use it exclusively though and insist that any science that contradicts it is ignorance or lies.

    I will concede on the animals first issue. However, I will not concede to the ridiculous notion that they existed in the flash of an eye and for just a few days before the “creation” of modern man. To believe so would invalidate an enormous amount of hard evidence and that would truly be ignorance at its peak. You stick with those ancient writers who believed that the sun revolved around the earth, the flat earth that is, and I will stick with and I will stick with the anthropologists and all of the others who have proven them wrong.

  30. The Razzler Says:

    It can be argued that the book of Genesis is a pastoral book. I believe that it teaches us the truth that God created the world and everything in it, and that everything was good before human selfishness and greed got in the way. I do not believe for a second that Genesis is a scientific book, beccause there are now details as to HOW God created the world. That just isn’t the point of the book. The whole 7 day thing could be a metaphore, to show that the world was created in stages. That doesn’t seem to have anything to contradict science, in my humble opinion. Not all Christians deny the accuracy of science, not all Christians insist that science and faith cannot be compatible.

  31. jonolan Says:

    I think that everyone should remember and understand that very, very few Christians believe in “Young Earth Creationism.” Few can or will take their Book(s) as the literal, verbatim truth and fact.

    I sort of alluded to that here:

    All of our holy books and oral histories have been passed down through so many translations and edits that they no longer carry the unabridged Word. Worse, all of these strictures have been interpreted and reinterpreted in the light of Mans understanding and conceit.

    Thank you all for your comments. It’s been an interesting discussion so far and, while passionate, it has been respectful of the people involved. Thank you all again for that.

  32. Hector Says:

    Hi, thanks for your comment on my post, just thought I’d return the compliment. Reading the discussion above, I wondered if you’d read any of Habermas (‘Modernity versus Postmodernity’ is particularly good), and his view that to engage in any moral/religious debate, one must believe in a universal moral code? Do you reckon subjectively defined faith is possible/desireable?

  33. eeyore Says:

    Dawkins- “almost certainly”… I love it!

  34. jonolan Says:

    Hector,

    I’ve studied Habermas’ work. Habermas is too caught up in defining the role of language for my tastes. Also, his universal moral code is snarled up in what I consider the the fallacy of achieving “good will” as the underlying goal of people. I really don’t give most people that much credit for abstract thought as a core motivation for their actions.

  35. HannahJ Says:

    ExpatBrian: “You stick with those ancient writers who believed that the sun revolved around the earth, the flat earth that is, and I will stick with and I will stick with the anthropologists and all of the others who have proven them wrong.”

    Beg pardon, but which writers associated with the Biblical authors believed in flat-earthism and geocentricism? If I remember correctly, those ideas weren’t connected with the Bible, only offshoots of the Church. I would appreciate sources on that instead of muted libel.

  36. jonolan Says:

    Hannah,

    I think it’s safe for Brian to say that the ancient writers of the Torah, Bible and Qu’ran – and their associated apocrypha – believed in a flat Earth and the Sun circled it. That was the science of the day, based on what their scholars could observe.

    The mistake, Brian, is using that as an argument against theism. Just because something was discovered or developed by an ancient people doesn’t make it wrong or ridiculous. It’s also a poor exercise in discourse to imply that the bulk of modern theists believe the same things about the natural worlds as their ancient predecessors.

  37. Brett Clements Says:

    I would like to offer my opinion. Though Mr. Dawkins says it is “almost” certain God as Devine creator does not exist, I say it is absolutely certain God exists. God said let there be light and there was light. Who can create light? Even Franklins experiments and inventions are put together with the ingredients provided by creation.
    As for my belief, The God I serve is not my delusion. The Bible I read says itself I in my own understanding cannot and will not agree with it’s teaching. Only by yeilding to the God who inspired the words can I know Him.
    This God is the only God who is from everlasting to everlasting. He is the beginning and the end. We cannot find His beginning. We will never see His end. He always was and always will be. No other religion can state with such “arrogance” it is the original. All of the world religions have a father who can be traced to a date in history. Only Christianity and Jewish faith have a beginning even before the dating of history.
    What I find to be arrogant is to think man can create a religion.
    Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

  38. Brett Clements Says:

    I must adress the comment before mine. The writers of the Bible may have thought the earth was flat, but the God who created the earth corrected their mistake.
    [It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: Isaiah 40:22, KJV

  39. expatbrian Says:

    I wasn’t arguing against the theism of the day. I was making an example that, just because these men wrote what they perceived to be true at the time, that does not make it the truth. Perceptions about the natural world cannot be assumed to be the only incorrect perceptions they may have had. The only evidence they give on the accuracy of their writings is that they are inspired by the word of God. That’s a little too convenient for me.

    I also did not say that theists today believe the same things, nor do I think that they do. At least the reasonable ones. But when a believer like Brett gives us the absurd example of Let there be light and there was – therefore God must exist because how else could there be light, that tells me that there are still theists out there who cannot and will not fathom any evidence beyond the book. Its as absurd as that tiresome and absurd watchmaker in the woods argument.

    Jonolan, if it wasn’t for your down to earth, common sense approach to this issue, I would never allow myself to be drawn (once again) into a discussion on the existence of a godhead.

  40. Brett Clements Says:

    Expatbrian,
    I am curious to know if you think anything could be wrong? Let me explain. Do you think adultery is wrong or do you think it is merely a choice? Do you think telling lies is wrong or do you think it depends on why it was told? I look forward to your response.

  41. Ricky Says:

    Brett,

    I don’t think this is a worthy debate to pull. Everyone knows where it’s going to lead. Nowhere.

    Brian,

    The way I look at it, no one will ever be able to prove/disprove the existence of God or a spiritual/supernatural being. How can we possibly prove that something exists that we can’t feel/see/touch/hear in the physical terms, or our world? It’s impossible. If you’re looking to disprove it, good luck because it isn’t going to happen. Human logic is flawed. If human logic were perfect then it sure takes a dang long time to figure out stuff. If human logic were perfect then we would possibly know everything and be able to prove everything logically. You and I know that isn’t the case.

    I sense that your dissatisfaction with religion is mostly aimed at the Judeo-Christian order of things, correct me if I’m wrong. But there is no other way to view “Christianity.” In the end it all comes down to this: Either you believe in the god of the Bible or you do not. Either you believe the claims of Jesus the Christ or you don’t. Either you believe the Bible to be true, or you don’t. Simple as that. It’s never going to be anything personal for me, and I beg you not to take that personal in anyway, as an attack or challenge. It’s simply my belief. Too much of my life has been changed by supernatural or seemingly illogical events, and I cannot discredit the existence of God or Christ as such.

    Sorry if I rambled, I just felt like I had to add that in here.

  42. jonolan Says:

    Brian,

    Sorry. Theists have been attacked with the “ancient primitives” often enough for long enough that we tend to jump when it’s brought up. Of course an religion – in its details – must be rethought as Man progresses.

    Brett,

    Atheists and Agnostics have been attacked with the “do you have any morality” often enough for long enough that they tend to jump when it’s brought up. Morality is not dependent of theism. Whether you’re an moral absolutist like myself or a relativist, there is no required religiosity in order to understand and adhere to proper behavior.

    A better argument for us theists might be that the seeming universality of “The Golden Rule” even among atheists is evidence of a divine plan and intrinsic set of divinely created rules.

    Ricky,

    You’re correct in saying that the debate will go nowhere – in the context of changing anyone’s opinions and beliefs. However, I think the debate does serve the purpose of refining people’s beliefs and their logic. Sometimes the argument is more important than the resolution 😉

    We’re flawed and cannot fully understand the universe of the God(s) – not even their existence. We’re also inside the system, so it is near impossible for us to have chance of proving the existence or lack of existence of something that exists outside those boundaries.

    We can review evidence and for hypotheses and theories by extrapolating from perceived effects – ala quantum physics and sub-atomic particle theory, but we can’t really – so far at least – provide definitive proof or disproof.

    Ah, but in the tension between thought, hope or fear and proof lies faith. Therein also lies faith”s shadow, doubt.

  43. MoriahJoy Says:

    A better argument for us theists might be that the seeming universality of The Golden Rule even among atheists is evidence of a divine plan and intrinsic set of divinely created rules.

    Was going to make that point but then you did beautifully. =)

    Ah, but in the tension between thought, hope or fear and proof lies faith. Therein also lies faiths shadow, doubt.

    Wonderful line.

  44. Aafke Says:

    Perhaps even that is only our own minds making it up.
    When I got into dinosaurs, (8 years old) I was amazed at how presicely earth evolved according to Genesis. And when I had to give a speech at my christain school, Ranging from the pre-cambrium to the Archeapterix (lasted 2 hours) I didn’t get the comment of my teacher: ”i told a nice story but off course it wasn’t true because God created the world in 6 days”
    I truly never understood what she was talking about until about 25 years later and I heard about evolutionists!

    All religions are man-made I think. And I don’t think God is some old dude with a beard. That is just too childish a take on an all-encompassing entity for me.

  45. Brett Clements Says:

    I disagree with the statement; “all religions are man made”. I also believe morality must have a source. My source is the God of the Bible. If you believe different I respect that. The idea man can make his own rules is ridiculous to me. All men can frame explanations to make their wrong ok. Even the ones who rape, kill and torture human beings. When morality is left to the judgement of man we all get hurt in the end. The golden rule is not enough. If you have no moral authority to dictate such a rule doing good is relevant to the doer. Killing Christians is good in the mind of extremist muslims. They do so in the guise of religion and good. Their golden rule is not golden at all

  46. Aafke Says:

    Killing christians is allright in the mind of deluded people who mistakingly call themselves muslims. The same goes for christains, and anybody else.
    The golden rule is that we should respect and take care of one another.
    I like this take on the three abrahamic religions:

  47. Brett Clements Says:

    You are correct about so called Muslims. Many call themselves Christians and live outside the direction set by scripture and falsely interpret scripture to justify their deeds. The golden rule is certainly a great one. I don’t want to appear to harbor hatred for any religion or it’s followers. The deviding line for me in accepting other religions as good if the followers abide by the golden rule is drawn at the directive works. What I mean is the book or documents used by said religion to be the devine word of their God. Most religions have an established book from which they teach and preach. Of course mine is the Holy Bible. I accept the Bible as the moral authority for my life. I also know I have not always followed the teachings as well as I should, and for that I thank God for His Grace!To be specific I accept the Old Testament to be the prophecy of the coming Messiah and the New Testament to be the fulfillment of said prophecy. I accept the New Testament as the directive for Christian life today. If I look into the book of another religion I should be able to know what the followers of that religion believe and accept as truth and direction. If they do not believe that they are not actually followers of that religion. They are merely observers. Every religion has it’s observers, and their true disciples. I happen to believe in absolutes. A person is either absolutely a believer or not, whatever the religion might be. Too many people go aimlessly through life looking into every option and never accepting one. Most people are so self obsorbed they cannot see life is about more than them. Before their birth life was. After their death life will continue to be. All of us are part of more than our short life. I hope this debate on this site will encourage many to search passionately for truth. Of course I would like for them to accpet Jesus Christ, but I also know many will not. Whatever direction you go may you be found by the absolute moral authority; God. I promise you He is not a delusion. We may not understand all things, but we certainly cannot deny things. We see life begin. We see life end. We see death cheated. We see health stripped away. Call it what you will, but it is all out of human authority.
    Don’t let life pass with no sense of connection with the one who put you here.

  48. Nabiha Meher Says:

    I don’t think Muslim scholars believed the earth was flat… I’m not sure about this- I’ll clarify.

    Someone just pointed out to me that the Quraan states that god created man from “clay and water.” So, apparently, if you want to interpret it thus, Islam supports evolution. The person who said this isn’t a very devout Muslim, but believes god “created” the universe in such a way that intelligent life would be formed. This isn’t my opinion…

  49. jonolan Says:

    Nabiha,

    Actually the educated world generally stopped believing a flat Earth in the 3rd century BCE. To be fair to Brian’s point however, the Book of Enoch (1 Enoch in modern nomenclature) does describe a flat Earth:

    “This is the first commandment of the luminaries: The sun is a luminary whose egress is an opening of heaven, which is located in the direction of the east, and whose ingress is another opening of heaven, located in the west. I saw six openings through which the sun rises and six openings through which it sets. The moon also rises and sets through the same openings, and they are guided by the stars; together with those whom they lead, they are six in the east and six in the west heaven. All of them are arranged one after another in a constant order. There are many windows both to the right and the left of these openings. First there goes out the great light whose name is the sun; its roundness is like the roundness of the sky; and it is totally filled with light and heat. The chariot in which it ascends is driven by the blowing wind. The sun sets in the sky in the west and returns by the northeast in order to go to the east; it is guided so that it shall reach the eastern gate and shine in the face of the sky”

    — 1 Enoch 72:2-5

    Since the currently known texts of this work are usually dated during the Second Temple period, between the 4th century BCE and the 1st century CE it is quite possible that the flat Earth theory had in some quarters been maintained into the early Common Era.

  50. expatbrian Says:

    Jonolan gave all the right responses for me to the earlier comments. Thanks for saving me the time and effort. As far as the golden rule, its a wonderful little thought that most religions wrote down as you pointed out. But as far as that setting the path for a moral code, I think not. Read the news. The Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims and even the Buddhists are slaughtering each other almost faster than we can reproduce.

    I gave up believing in god when I finally realized that people were not basically good at all but just the opposite. We are only civilized as long as it is convenient and our needs are met. Give us some real stress, challenge us with life or death choices or even less severe choices and we’ll give up our civilized nature in a heartbeat. Again, look around.

    Ricky, thanks for your comments as well. But I caution you, never say never and don’t assume anything is impossible forever. We’ve been proven wrong too many times.

  51. Ricky Says:

    Brian,

    I’ll take your advice, and I agree with you, that we’ve been proven wrong about a lot of things. I by no means doubt the power of human progress, I think it’s one of the things that makes us more human.

    But I do believe that certain things are impossible to either attain, prove, understand, etc.

    God bless you, as well as everyone else on here.

  52. expatbrian Says:

    Jonolan, A final thought. Good post and great thread. While I respectfully disagree with Ricky and some things she(?) believes, she gives about the most level headed, logical and non confrontational arguments that I’ve seen on this issue.

    Your lucky to have someone like that following your blog. She’s a keeper.

  53. Ricky Says:

    Haha. Well Brian, I am actually a guy, but thank you for your comments. I realized about a year ago, that being confrontational, argumentative, or irrational about sharing/defending my faith doesn’t exactly help me become a better witness for God—it usually impedes it. So your comments let me know I’m heading in the right direction.

    Thanks.

Leave a Reply