If you were confronted by an atheist who challenged your faith, what would you say?
Now that was clever!
In the art of logic, the counter argument is akin to judo. You can use the weight of your opponent’s argument to flip him on his side.
Dawkins starts off with a valid point: faith, by definition, involves complete assent to a given claim or set of claims whose truth is not entirely evident. He concludes from this that faith cannot be called rational, because it’s not based on evidence.
Then, as if by magic, Dawkins sticks his foot in it when he admits that he has faith in his wife and that he can give plenty of evidence for it. He has reasons to believe that his wife is faithful, but he cannot prove it beyond any doubt. Yet he still doesn’t doubt.
That’s what we just called faith.
Within seconds, Dawkins is forced to admit that he has faith in something based on evidence. Exactly what he was arguing against just a couple of seconds ago.
And the Biltrix is… (i.e., the missing point)…
Atheism is a BELIEF! Atheists don’t doubt their atheism, whereas they cannot prove what they hold to be undoubtedly true — namely, that God does not exist. So why do they scoff at believers for doing the exact same thing, namely, believing in things, like the divinity of Christ, which they cannot prove?
Dawkins mocks religious belief because it is so unscientific. Yet so is atheism. So he should either mock his own atheism on the same grounds that he mocks religion, or stop taking pop-shots at other people’s sincere beliefs.
Live by the sword; die by the sword. The alternative would be live and let live.
One point for the the other side. Next question Mr. Dawkins:
Any more questions?
On deck for tomorrow: losing my religion…