The God Delusion

1. The God Delusion Engaging the worldview of : By: Dr. Richard Dawkins

2. Considerations As we read through the quotes from the book: • Set you personal feelings to the side for a moment and consider how reasonable it sounds to our children and those who don't have a relationship with Jesus. • Recognize that theses statements come from a worldview that resonates with the "generation x" and millennials in western society, because they were taught to think this way. • Consider how you would respond to the quote if someone asked you to address it right now.

3. — Proverbs 29:11 (HCSB) A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man holds it in check.

4. Chapter - sections CHAPTER 3: ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE • THOMAS AQUINAS’ “PROOFS” (pg. 77) • THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS AND OTHER A PRIORI ARGUMENTS (pg. 80) • THE ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY (pg. 86) • THE ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL “EXPERIENCE” (pg. 87) • THE ARGUMENT FROM SCRIPTURE (pg. 92) • THE ARGUMENT FROM ADMIRED RELIGIOUS SCIENTISTS (pg. 97) • PASCAL’S WAGER (pg. 103) • BAYSIAN ARGUMENTS (pg. 105)

5. THOMAS AQUINAS’ “PROOFS”

6. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 77 The Cosmological Argument “There must have been a time when no physical things existed. But, since physical things exist now, there must have been something non-physical to bring them into existence, and that something we call God.”

7. “The whole argument turns of the familiar question ‘who made god’, which most thinking people discover for themselves.” — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 77 objection [cosmological arguments] “rely upon the idea of a regress and invoke God to terminate it. They make the entirely unwarranted assumption that God himself is immune to the regress.” — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 109

8. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument syllogism as presented by dawkins There must have been a time before physical things existed. Physical things exist now. Therefore, something non-physical caused physical things to exist. • We call the non-physical causer God.

9. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument There must have been a time before physical things existed. • To deny this would to be equivalent to saying matter and energy (the universe) has always existed, with no beginning. • The best science available tells us there must have been some type of beginning since the universe is expanding. • An infinitely old universe would either be infinitely hot or infinitely cold. • All cosmologies that propose an infinite cycle of universes are metaphysical in nature since they are untestable.

10. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument Physical things exist now. • The only was to deny this would be to advocate that physical reality is an illusion. • Most people take it as a obvious fact that physical things exist.

11. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument Physical things exist now. • The only was to deny this would be to advocate that physical reality is an illusion. • Most people take it as a obvious fact that physical things exist.

12. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument Therefore, something non-physical caused physical things to exist. • Whatever caused the first physical thing to exist, by definition, must have been non-physical. • A non-physical cause is by definition super-natural since the naturalistic materialist would agree that everything in nature requires matter and energy to operate.

13. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument syllogism as presented by Dr. William Lane Craig Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/popular-articles-the-kalam-cosmological-argument

14. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the cosmological argument Dawkins would have us believe that the cosmological argument cannot be used to prove the existence of God. He is correct, the cosmological argument should not be used to prove the existence of God. • The cosmological argument should be used to show that if the universe began to exist then it must have had a supernatural beginning. • The atheist cannot scientifically argue this point since science cannot speak to an event that occurred before time, space, energy, matter, and natural laws existed.

15. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 77 omniscience/omnipotence sidebar “Incidentally, it has not escaped the notice of logicians that omniscience and omnipotence are mutually incompatible. If God is omniscient, he must already know how he is going to intervene to change the course of history using his omnipotence. But that means he can’t change his mind about his intervention, which means he is not omnipotent.”

16. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE omniscience/omnipotence sidebar This is nothing more than the old “Can God make a rock so big He cannot move it?” • The question is logically incoherent. • The question fundamentally assumes that God acts within time just as we do. • God operates within time with us since it is the only way we can perceive Him. • God also operates outside of time, since He created time before it existed, and knows the end from the beginning. • This is a huge topic and an area of study all by itself.

17. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 79 The teleological Argument “Things in the world, especially living things, look as though they have been designed. Nothing that we know looks designed unless it is designed. Therefore there must have been a designer, and we call him God.”

18. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 79 objection “Thanks to Darwin, it is no longer true to say that nothing that we know looks designed unless it is designed. Evolution by natural selection produces an excellent simulacrum of design, mounting prodigious heights of complexity and elegance.”

19. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the teleological argument Dawkins focuses on “the appearance of design”, but ignores the primary arguments from the Intelligent Design community. ID advocates aren’t interested in appearance per se. There are several areas of interest: • Information content and the mechanism for creating information. • The problem of first life. Even if Darwinian Evolution were correct it still requires life to begin its process. It does nothing to describe the appearance of first life. • Explain how mutation causes change that is a benefit when the real world mutation has never been seen to be a benefit.

20. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE the teleological argument Biologists fail to be able to explain away irreducibly complex phenomena such as the eye, flagellar motor, and the blood clotting system (Dr. Michael Behe). • All arguments against irreducible complexity can be shown to be faulty (Dr. Stephen C. Meyer). There are no naturally occurring examples of non-living matter becoming living matter. • All experiments in a lab trying to replicate this have failed. • Any experiments that did create life would still have been intelligently designed.

21. THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS AND OTHER A PRIORI ARGUMENTS

22. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ONTOLOGICAL AND OTHER A PRIORI ARGUMENTS The Ontological Argument is a philosophical argument first stated by Saint Anselm of Canturbury in his book Proslogion. The concept is that God is the greatest being that can be conceived. • Every attribute of God is expressed in the greatest possible way. • When considering the attribute of existence, existence is superior to non-existence. • Therefore, Anselm argues that God must exist.

23. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ONTOLOGICAL AND OTHER A PRIORI ARGUMENTS Dawkins takes exception to the concept that existence is superior to non-existence. • The Ontological Argument is very complicated and nuanced when used as a legitimate argument for God. • Its probably best to leave this argument to the philosophers. • To the average person by the time you get to the concept of the superiority of existence you have moved beyond a practical apologetic tool.

24. THE ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY

25. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY The general argument is that if humans were a product of blind unguided evolution that there is no reason to expect that we would have the ability to appreciate beauty (aesthetics). • The fact that we can have an emotional reaction to a painting, sunset, or piece of music provides no survival benefit or advantage in procreation. • Some argue that we wouldn’t recognize beauty if there wasn’t a creator that appreciated beauty or was beautiful. Since there is a need there must be some way to fulfill it.

26. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY Dawkins argues that a beautiful work doesn’t prove God, it only proves there was an artist. The disconnect in the two positions is based on how the problem is stated. • Dawkins is correct when he states that a beautiful thing only proves there was a person who created it. This is a Straw Man Argument. Dawkins implies that he will address the argument of how beauty is recognized, but he answers the question of what do beautiful things prove.

27. THE ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL “EXPERIENCE”

28. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 88 “This argument from personal experience is the one that is most convincing to those who claim to have had one. But it is the least convincing to anyone else, and anyone knowledgeable about psychology.”

29. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL “EXPERIENCE” An argument from personal experience occurs anytime we support our beliefs with something we experienced. This is not a formal argument that can be logically evaluated. • The only thing opposition can hope to do is explain away your experience. These arguments are subjective and relative to the person who experienced them. They can be powerful, especially when used relationally.

30. THE ARGUMENT FROM SCRIPTURE

31. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 92 “In any case, as I said, there is no good historical evidence that he [Jesus] ever thought he was divine.”

32. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 92 & 93 “Ever since the nineteenth century, scholarly theologians have made an overwhelming case that the gospels are not reliable accounts of what happened in the history of the real world. All were written long after the death of Jesus, and also after the epistles of Paul, which mention almost none of the alleged facts of Jesus’ life. All were then copied and recopied, through many different ‘Chinese Whispers generations’ by fallible scribes who, in any case, had their own religious agendas.”

33. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM SCRIPTURE The argument that Jesus didn’t claim divinity can only be claimed by reading the Bible from a completely modern western perspective. When read in it’s ANE/Jewish context it is obvious that Jesus claims divinity again and again. If the Bible isn’t a reliable account of historical events then there are no ancient documents that would qualify as reliable. Biblical historians agree that the NT canonical books were all written within 70 years of the crucifixion and resurrection.

34. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM SCRIPTURE Biblical translation isn’t subject to duplication errors due to multiple generations since each translation goes back to the same source manuscripts. There are legitimate translation concerns, but they related to specific translation choices made by the translators. All people have their own agendas and biases (including Richard Dawkins), that does not mean that they are not capable of being honest and reporting facts. Reading the Bible is effective, even for the non-believer; but throwing out a handful of scriptures without the necessary Biblical context is practically ineffective for someone who rejects the Bible.

35. THE ARGUMENT FROM ADMIRED RELIGIOUS SCIENTISTS

36. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 100 “The only website I could find that claimed to list ‘Nobel Prize-winning Scientific Christians’ came up with six, out of a total of several hundred scientific Nobelists.” While reviewing the book, I could not find where Dawkins cites the website he found the information for the quote above.

37. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM ADMIRED RELIGIOUS SCIENTISTS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_Nobel_laureates

38. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE THE ARGUMENT FROM ADMIRED RELIGIOUS SCIENTISTS Dawkins is correct in much of his criticism but his data appears faulty. The beliefs of another human being may influence someone to take a look at the Christian worldview, but it should never be in primary factor in coming to faith in Jesus. The question of God’s existence has absolutely nothing to do with who believes in him.

39. PASCAL’S WAGER

40. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE PASCAL’S WAGER Blaise Pascal writes in Pensées: • God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives. • A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up. • You must wager (it is not optional). • Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. • Wager, then, without hesitation that He is…There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain. • But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

41. — Dr. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, pg. 104 “Believing is not something you can decide to do as a matter of policy. At least, it is not something I can decide to do as an act of will…Pascal’s Wager could only ever be an argument for feigning belief in God.”

42. ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE PASCAL’S WAGER Dawkins is correct. Just because I think it is in my best interest to believe something does not in fact make me genuinely believe it. Pascal is coming at the problem from a position of works based religion…not genuine relationship. The Bible indicates that God prepares the way for us to receive salvation (1 Corinthians 2:9-10). That means that simply coming to a purely rational decision cannot generate genuine faith.

43. CONCLUSION

44. CHAPTER 3: ARGUMENTS FOR GOD’S EXISTENCE conclusion Dawkins makes several valid criticisms of some of the arguments that Christian apologists have historically made. There are several critical questions we must ask as we consider his criticism of these arguments: • Is Dawkins stating the argument correctly and completely? • Are these arguments actually being promoted by Christian apologists and theologians today? • Is Dawkins qualified to make expert statements on subjects like scriptural criticism, historicity, and exegesis.

45. — Proverbs 29:11 (HCSB) A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man holds it in check.