Richard Dawkins and Doubting Thomas

  • Thread starter Thread starter djeter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

djeter

Guest
http://payingattentiontothesky.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/caravaggio-thomas.jpg?w=450&h=326

I was really surprised in reading athiest Richard Dawkins exegesis of John 20: 24-29, the familiar story of Doubting Thomas:
  1. Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.
  2. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.”
  3. A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
  4. Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
  5. Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
  6. Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
“Science is based upon verifiable evidence. Religious faith not only lacks evidence, its independence from evidence is its pride and joy, shouted from the rooftops. Why else would Christians wax critical of doubting Thomas? The other apostles are held up to us as exemplars of virtue because faith was enough for them. Doubting Thomas, on the other hand, required evidence. Perhaps he should be the patron saint of scientists.”

“The other apostles are held up to us as exemplars of virtue because faith was enough for them” is almost a standard interpretation of the passage. So I was surprised to see a religious study group at State University of New York, University at Buffalo take our leading atheist light to task.

Enjoy Dawkins get his comeuppance here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2010/08/04/richard-dawkins-and-doubting-thomas/

dj
 
djeter said:
http://payingattentiontothesky.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/caravaggio-thomas.jpg?w=450&h=326

I was really surprised in reading athiest Richard Dawkins exegesis of John 20: 24-29, the familiar story of Doubting Thomas:

“Science is based upon verifiable evidence. Religious faith not only lacks evidence, its independence from evidence is its pride and joy, shouted from the rooftops. Why else would Christians wax critical of doubting Thomas? The other apostles are held up to us as exemplars of virtue because faith was enough for them. Doubting Thomas, on the other hand, required evidence. Perhaps he should be the patron saint of scientists.”

**Untrue. Science shows us that if we go back far enough, we are forced to come to terms with where the first atoms came from. I’m not going to get deep into it, but the only logical posibility is that they were made by something supernatural. God, in other words. **
“The other apostles are held up to us as exemplars of virtue because faith was enough for them” is almost a standard interpretation of the passage. So I was surprised to see a religious study group at State University of New York, University at Buffalo take our leading atheist light to task.

Enjoy Dawkins get his comeuppance here:

payingattentiontothesky.com/2010/08/04/richard-dawkins-and-doubting-thomas/

dj
Click to expand...
 
Hi Redratfish:

Science does not entertain the supernatural in its hypotheses, which is why you can never “prove” or have “evidence” for God to an atheist.

dj
 
djeter said:
Religious faith not only lacks evidence, its independence from evidence is its pride and joy, shouted from the rooftops.

This is nonsense. As Venerable John Henry Newman said of faith: “For directly you have a conviction that you ought to believe, reason has done its part, and what is wanted for faith is, not proof, but will.”

To boot, Dawkins misses a key point of Thomas. Thomas had the evidence of witnesses as well as prior testimony that Christ would conquer death. He just didn’t believe it until he saw for himself. Christ Himself even called Thomas’ belief inferior those who “see” without direct perception but in light of prophecies fulfilled, witness of neighbor and such that is completed by faith. I mean, if Dawkins was right, Jesus wouldn’t have shown Himself risen at all. Some early writer would have just said, “Oh, yeah, that Jesus guy rose from the dead. Witnesses? No, but take our word for it.”
Click to expand...
 
I’ve never read any of Richard Dawkins books but I’ve read a review on River Out of Eden and I think it has Christian content. It seems the best one out there at the moment.

I think he’s better than Darwin.
 
MarcoPolo said:
This is nonsense. As Venerable John Henry Newman said of faith: “For directly you have a conviction that you ought to believe, reason has done its part, and what is wanted for faith is, not proof, but will.”

To boot, Dawkins misses a key point of Thomas. Thomas had the evidence of witnesses as well as prior testimony that Christ would conquer death. He just didn’t believe it until he saw for himself. Christ Himself even called Thomas’ belief inferior those who “see” without direct perception but in light of prophecies fulfilled, witness of neighbor and such that is completed by faith. I mean, if Dawkins was right, Jesus wouldn’t have shown Himself risen at all. Some early writer would have just said, “Oh, yeah, that Jesus guy rose from the dead. Witnesses? No, but take our word for it.”
Click to expand...
Exactly the point made in the post…

Thanks

dj
 
Well actually if you read the Gospels, particularly Luke, most of the disciples did not believe when when the girls told them they saw him. They thought it ‘old wives tales’. Only John and Peter entertained the possibility running to the tomb, and Peter actually seeing him before his appearance in the upper room. Even upon seeing him they were still not believing their eyes. He commanded them to “Handle me…” and ate in their presence and explained how he fulfilled the bulk of the prophecies concerning the Messiah.

Most of em in other words needed to have infallible proof that he rose. Upon having this they evangelized joyously and lovingly. All of them but John, going to their deaths not renouncing what they WITNESSED, not just believed.

I love how much press a dumb *** like the dawkins guy gets when he is so easily rebuked.
The world ‘loves’ their own. They put em up on a pedestal, proclaiming their blasphemous statements on the front pages of newspapers and at the beginning of news programs. Upon being handily rebuked, you’re likely never to hear of it on the news, and you might find the rebuke in a sentence or two on page h-14 of your newspaper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top