Customer Reviews: Read 1245 more reviews...
 A brief explanation of Dawkins' flawed logic August 31, 2008
3 out of 13 found this review helpful
Dawkins is highly skilled master of terminological inexactitude whereby he briskfully overlooks the employment of primary sources in his documentation outside of the science arena.
A master revisionist historian/scientist with a finely tuned sense for highly biased selective observations. The problem is, he knows next to nothing about history, theology, or approaching life as an entity other than a robot. Naturally, this catapults him into the revisionist category.
I could easily write a book in response to Dawkins. FTR, I believe in a Creator and I am a scientist. Go figure, I am a scientist with emotions and a sense of existence persisting of more than just logical, robotic thought-processes. I am the exception, not the rule.
Dawkins is clearly not a historian. I heard a debate at Oxford University, where one of the scientists claimed Stephen Jay Gould knows next to nothing about a plethora of scientific subjects in discrediting his "popular science" theories. Upon further investigation it is undeniable that Dawkins chooses, I hope it is purposeful, to understand next to nothing about history, and his use of secular quotations are disturbingly out of historical context. A difficult question is posed in regards to where I should begin in shredding his interpretation of history.
My recommendation to Dawkins is stick to science. Remain the example of what a person should not be outside of the laboratory.
I heard him speak in a public forum. His understanding of the biblical claims are so rudimentary, it would be like a Rabbi or Pope debating an astrophysicist, whereby the Rabbi or Pope starts his argument against science, "I do not know much about astrophysics, but..."
I am not making any claims about the biblical texts, because I am not yet qualified to assess their validity. One thing is unequivocally true, Dawkins is surely not qualified to provide an evaluation regarding the authenticity of the Hebrew Bible.
I would like to see Dawkins debate Gerald Schroeder. Dawkins is wise enough not to box the heavyweights. Schroeder not only knows more about science, he knows more about the Hebrew Bible than Dawkins.
 Truly Honest Review ~ Yes I Read The Book August 28, 2008
9 out of 11 found this review helpful
It is my goal to provide an honest review of this book, as seen from my perspective. I appreciate what Dawkins says, from the viewpoint of his arguement. Dawkins also, surprisingly, admits that the existance of God is a 50/50 chance. He does, however, provide arguments for why he believes God is improbable. The book is split into two parts. The first half of the book is Dawkins' argument against religion. The second half is a scientific history of religion and a hypothesis for why it began.
Regardless of if you are Atheist or Theist, I think both sides can appreciate (not neccessarily agree with) Dawkins' arguments. For Atheist's, Dawkins provides a central scientific argument for Atheists beliefs. Saddly enough, Atheist's are persecuted everywhere, simply because of what they believe. This is eerily reminiscent of the persecutions of jews and christians elsewhere. Theist's should not look at this book in disdain, but see it as a resource. Challenge makes people stronger, and "The GOD Delusion" is definitely a challenge.
This book was written for the Atheist, not the Theist or Christian. Dawkins states repeatedly that its not his intent to convert people, but to provide his arguments to those who share his belief. I found his arguments well thoughtout, a bit over explained, and quite stimulating. For the Athiest this book is a true breath of fresh air and a source of solace.
While I have no doubt, that because I said positive things about this book that my review will be terribly rated, I felt compelled to share my view. As an Atheist living in the christian dominated American society, I'm often smothered by the religious beliefs of others. While the Constitution provides freedom of religion, it does not afford freedom FROM religion.
Mr. Dawkins, Thank you sir. Thank you for letting me know that I am not alone in my beliefs, and thank you for your richly inspiring arguments.
 Does anyone else think this is totally creepy!? August 27, 2008
5 out of 32 found this review helpful
To write a book about God not existing is completely morbid and sad in a way I can't describe. The pics above also are sad. That people actively try to discredit God blows my mind. What is the point? To try to take away people's hope? God is hope and love. Without God everything is completely meaningless. Might as well kill yourself now cause there's no point in living if you believe this stuff. God is real people, open your eyes and look around you.
SERIOUS WASTE OF TIME August 27, 2008
6 out of 29 found this review helpful
All you need to know is: Richard Dawkins knows everything thats possible to know, he dismisses the idea of God, and you better do it, too if you know whats good for you. He especially dislikes the Judeo-Christian God, and walks meekly around the Muslims; they likely wont turn the other cheek to him.
When you know it all, there's nothing else to discover. When youre a famous scientist like Richard Dawkins you know and can dismiss every permutation and combination of ways God might occur. You certainly know why there is something rather than nothing in our universe.
Repent now, the end time is nearer than you think!! August 27, 2008
2 out of 34 found this review helpful
This book is full of lies from the devil himself. The only truth is in the bible. The bible is 1/3 prophecy from God. Read it for yourself. The only way to eternal life in heaven is through Jesus Christ the son of God, who died to save us from eternal death in hell. Repent now, we are living in the end times.
|
