User reviews

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

This is a book written by a very confused author. Dawkins' book was fantasic. I encourage all to skip this and go read The God Delusion.

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

clouds of the lord, is one of the most revealing books of all time ,after reading it you will discount dawkins theories of no god as childish and foolish,it adds another dimension to understanding the bible from a scientific and logical view,and makes the bible real and understandable in todays modern age. 

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

Poor argurment
Does not at all provide a rational explanation against to negate dawkins.

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

The authors badly misrepresent (or perhaps misunderstand) Dawkins' arguments. This is particularly evident when they suggest that a scientific "theory of everything" (if one is ever proposed) might well be more complex than the lesser theories it explains. As Dawkins has correctly alluded, any acceptable "theory of everything" MUST be simpler than the lesser theories it explains. Otherwise a simple sum of previously existing theories would be more acceptable. An explanation of complexity that supposes the existence of something more complex than that which is being explained results in an infinite regress. Complexity MUST be explained by simplicity, or it is no explanation at all.
The theory of evolution by natural selection avoids introducing an infinite regress and elegantly explains the full complexity of biological life we observe today as arising from utter simplicity through gradual random variation and non-random natural selection over billions of years. Even without supporting evidence, any rational person (who understands the theory and whose judgment has not been clouded by religious indoctrination) must prefer the theory of evolution to that of the much less probable intelligent design.
Add the overwhelming evidence all around us and the deal is clinched. Everything we observe in the world is exactly what we should expect if evolution by natural selection is true (the family tree describing the evolution of all species on earth from common ancestors is quite literally written in our genes) while we often see the very opposite of what we should expect if all life were created by God.
Given such a rational explanation and overwhelming evidence for the existence of ourselves and all other life on earth, there is simply no reason to suspect God has played a role in the creation of anything, let alone us in His image, or that He exists at all. With no need of God to explain our existence, the conclusion that God exists, listens to our thoughts, and performs miracles is completely and utterly delusional. The only rational conclusion is that it is we who created God in our image rather than the other way around.

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

A decent critique of Dawkins book, "The God Delusion." As soon as you read the pages of "The God Delusion" you quickly see the almost cult like fanaticism that Dawkins has in his view that all religion is bad for society and the religious are nothing but "dyed-in-the-wool faith-heads." McGrath brings these and other anti-religious views of Dawkins out in a well thought out way.
He references the many places Dawkins appeals to his own view of science and lacks the ability to allow anyone who calls themselves a scientist to hold to any form of Theism or Agnosticism. Such people can't really be serious about science, these would include Francis Collins (architect of the Human Genome Project and author of "The Language of God"), David Berlinski (Academic Philosopher / Mathematician and author of "The Devils Delusion") and others who face the wrath of Dawkins for not holding to sciences atheistic roots. This statement couldn't be farther from the truth for if we look into history's past we find that most scientist like Kepler, Newton and so on believed in a transcendent Creator of the universe.
Thanks to McGrath's critique, both Atheist and Theist can be enlightened to Dawkins prejudices that apparently and obviously shape his views on religion as a whole. Dawkins seems to ignore all of the millions of goods throughout

User ratings

5 stars
4 stars
3 stars
2 stars
1 star

All reviews - 21
2 stars - 0
1 star - 6

All reviews - 21
Editorial reviews - 0

All reviews - 21