Why are you so obsessed with Richard Dawkins? Your rather desperate post suggests that he's a bit too alive for your comfort.
Anonymous,It's truly sad that your (I assume) naturalistic bias is so strong that you read this entire post without taking a single thing away from it.Allow me to help: 1)This blog is called atheism is dead. 2)As such, the topic of discussion here more often than not is atheism.3)Dawkins is the current atheist darling. 4)Therefore, Mariano and other contributors have to touch on Dawkins a lot.I know logic is a foreign concept to many of you infidels, but this is basic. C'mon.What this particular post shows, is that far from Dawkins, "being too alive for our comfort", he is rather a pathetic example of just how poor contemporary popular (and even scholarly) atheist critiques of theism in general, and Christianity in particular are. It shows Dawkins has no desire to find truth, simply to bully those who believe differently than he does. He has no desire to place his ideas side-by-side those of men who disagree (D'Souza, Craig, McGrath), because it will:1) Show that these men have a much greater grasp on the realities of the issues being debated and 2) Show that Dawkins main point that theists have no reason(s) to believe in God is simply the result of: poor logic, misrepresentations and inadequate representations of evidence, arguments from outrage or ignorance (this esp. makes up the bulk of the new atheist literature), and a horrible desire to act and talk tough when he has nothing to back it all up with.So there you go. Although I suspect if you had actually read the post rather than just the title and then rushed to defend this atheist hero, you wouldn't have needed this explanation of the explanation.
I think it suggests things are getting a little boring. We need Dawkins and his entertaining bigotry then hopefully see him used as William Lane Craigs whipping post just to mix thing up a little
Do you guys think public debates are a reliable way of determining the merits of contrasting positions? Of course not!Public debates are show business. Derek,For scholarly critiques of theism I recommend:Graham OppyMichael Martinor J.L. MackieFor popular, this is the best.
No but they do raise interesting points from which one can take, look into further and make up their own mind about. They can also entertaining
Well, one test for life is to see if subject in question is still producing mass amounts of fecal matter.Hmmm... yup, that's a positive. "Public debates are show business."Well I wouldn't have guessed that after seeing your various hyperlinks to authors/speakers who apparently make a career off the atheism/rationalist circuit. No doubt, they have no worries about comparing or contrasting their scholarly critiques during their lectures/sermons on the power of the Holy Non-Spirit. For them, it's much easier to determine the merits of contrasting positions with a strawman rather than a speaking individual.
Hi derek.All good stuff.Dawkins must have seen the demolition of his rottweiler Hitchens so dont hold your breath that he will ever debate Dr Craig