characters Gunning for God é PDF eBook or Kindle ePUB free

Summary Gunning for God

characters Gunning for God é PDF, eBook or Kindle ePUB free ¿ New ideas about the nature of God and Christianity that will give Dawkins' best friends and worst enemies alike some stimulating food for thought Tackling Hawking Dawkins Dennett Hitchens and a newcomer in the field—the French philosopher Michel Onfray—JohCh in this insightful book Since the twin towers crashed to the ground on September 11 there has been no end to attacks on religion Claims abound that religion is dangerous that it kills and that it poisons everything And if religion is the problem with the world say the New Atheists the answer is simple get rid of it Of course things. Although some of the author's critiues of the New Atheist movement are spot on ie mere disbelief in God does not automatically make you Bright the final chapters border on the inane as he tries to prove such things as miracles and the divinity of Christ You get the sense that he's preaching to the converted in the second half of the book I didn't believe in Christianity before I read this book and I still don't believe in it now

Free download ✓ PDF, eBook or Kindle ePUB free ç John C. Lennox

New ideas about the nature of God and Christianity that will give Dawkins' best friends and worst enemies alike some stimulating food for thought Tackling Hawking Dawkins Dennett Hitchens and a newcomer in the field the French philosopher Michel Onfray John Lennox points out some of the most glaring fallacies in the New Atheist approa. Here then is a book arguing against some ill mannered people who are making needlessly offensive remarks about something I don’t believe in but think we should all be polite about I don’t like the New Brash Atheists but I don’t like John Lennox’s book either but I'll give it a solid three stars he really does try hard This book is a refutation of a refutation The “New Atheists” came out and refuted Christianity so John C Lennox Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University no less is refuting their refutationDawkins says “yah You Christians suck” and Lennox says “oh yeah Well you suck worse and you never wash your socks”In fairness Lennox does acknowledge that Dawkins his crew are not every atheist’s cup of tea they sure ain’t mine Atheists are clearly divided about the aggressive approach of the New Atheists and some find it positively embarrassingWHAT IS FAITH If scientific research is thought to be still worth pursuing scientists have to believe in the rational intelligibility of the universe as their fundamental article of faith or basic assumption You cannot begin to do physics without believing in that intelligibilityThe concept of faith brings on one of my headaches – once again we are dragged into the semantic morass is atheism a faith Well I’m still saying no Prof Lennox says that I myself believe in loads of stuff I can’t prove – electricity Goldilocks planets black holes Susan Boyle subatomic particles But I believe that people other than me can rigorously prove their existence Not so with religious assertions You have no proof you only have revelation A religious friend of mine says well look here for a couple of thousand years almost everybody has believed in this stuff and you say they were all wrong Brainy people too Isn’t that a leetle bit arrogant And I say well yes I think they were all wrong It’s a bit feebleAND JUSTICE FOR ALLProf Lennox tries to say that religion is not just wish fulfilment But here he is on the subject of justice At times I try to imagine what the glorious realm is like and the uestion arises within me if the veil which now separates the seen and the unseen world were to be parted for a moment and we could see how God has treated say the myriads of innocent children who have suffered from horrendous evil is it just possible that all our concerns about God’s handling of the situation would instantly dissolveI fear the answer from me anyway would be no Lennox’s idea of justice is different to mine – or perhaps it’s the concept of “justice” itself which is offensive to me If a great crime is committed – Lennox’s example is Josef Mengele’s horrible experiments on children at Auschwitz – he says that there will be a Judgement Day So Mengele and all his accomplices will be judged and punished we earnestly believe And that is justice No one will ever get away with anything even if it looks like they do from our earthly perspective But before my eyes there is still the great suffering which happened and great suffering plus great punishment does not make it all good The original grief pain and misery cannot un happen The punishment of the offenders is a footnote and does not fix anything ask the parents of any murdered childWHAT HAS AN ATHEIST GOT THAT ANYONE WOULD WANT TO BUYNothing Lennox gets this right and atheists have to cough up We offer no hope no firm foundation of morality although Lennox comes very close to saying in the crudest possible way that if you ditch religion there will be moral chaos – what we don’t have moral chaos now Of course we doWhy anyone would want to abandon their faith and become an atheist is beyond me I would never recommend that It’s not a very cheery thing to be Have you ever seen an Ingmar Bergman film It's like thatWE SEE THINGS DIFFERENTLYThe I read Christian writers the I have to rather sadly conclude that there is no talking to them and from their point of view there is no talking to me We have entirely different concepts of what evidence is for instance or what makes life meaningful – we are forever talking past each other The visions which Christians find beautiful atheists consider horrific such as Christ’s death on the cross and the concept of atonement and such as the idea of heaven and hellA GOD I COULD BELIEVE INNo one examines what God is much in the Christian books I have read The authors assume we all think the same thing about God that he is omnipotent eternal creator of the universe and creator of himself Oh and also that he is completely interested in and involved with humanity But I think differently I think it’s very likely there was something we may as well call God for want of a better term – it’s what the astrophysicists try to explain about the big bang and the creation of the laws of physics and gravitational singularities and what all It happened it was real us non astrophysicists will never understand it It’s all way above our pay grade In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters And God said Let there be light and there was light That still sounds good to me But why we need to assume that God continued to exist after the Big Bang is something I never uite got – God was a one time thing a fleeting micro moment He only stuck around to create the universe once that was done and it didn’t take long he was gone like snow on the water Job doneOR MAYBEOr okay let’s go with the idea that God didn’t go away I can imagine him getting lonely like the Christian writers propose they actually do say that and wanting to create some creatures with free will to see what would happen I imagine him not getting it right first time having not done it before so there would be various attempts at making a planet which could evolve human beings God created evolution I never saw any contradiction there So just like Windows I think there would be several versions of the Humanity Experiment before he got it right In this scenario I think the human race we have here on this planet is clearly an early version 21 maybe there’s so much wrong with it you don’t need me to make a list I imagine God occasionally remembering Planet Earth with a shudder He thinks he should probably have deleted us a long time ago Maybe he’ll get round to it soon just after he fixes the bugs in Humanity 12

John C. Lennox ç 5 characters

Gunning for GodAren’t uite so straightforward Arguing that the New Athiests' irrational and unscientific methodology leaves them guilty of the very obstinate foolishness they criticize in dogmatic religious folks this erudite and wide ranging guide to religion in the modern age packs some debilitating punches and scores big for religious rationalis. I like John Lennox and enjoyed this book as like his others it's very concise and well written My specific gripes are that A in places he seemed a little too smug and personal about even the smallest flaw in Dawkins Hitchens arguments It made me feel a bit uncomfortable as in the spoken debates he cites the content is not designed to be pulled apart word by word That's the very nature of spoken debate It's not an academic paper where every word is considered before selection B it would have been nice to see some other views on miracles and science other than Hume and C S Lewis Lennox seemed to have read a lot on Hume and spent a lot of time rebutting his popularist argument that miracles are against nature Maybe no one else has any different arguments other than Hume's but I don't believe that Other than that I felt the book was well reasoned and strongly presented Disclaimer I am already a Christian