Rabbi Sacks (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, January 02, 2013, 11:46 (4135 days ago) @ romansh

ROMANSH: Slightly off topic ...
atheism and agnosticism are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Similarly neither are theism and agnosticism.-As I see it, they can only be mutually exclusive for fundamentalists on either side. The essence of agnosticism is that it remains open to both possibilities while accepting neither.-ROMANSH: A strong or Gnostic atheist might say something like there is no God.
Now for all his faults Dawkins has carefully avoided saying this. What he is adamant about is the nonsensical Christian (that is nonsensical for him and me) interpretations of a literal Christian God. (And no doubt any of the Abrahamic, Norse, Roman Greek and other gods).
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102740/Richard-Dawkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-doe...-On one level, we are ALL agnostics, because none of us can KNOW whether any sort of god exists or not. The title The God Delusion, however, should tell you all you need to know about Dawkins' degree of certainty concerning the existence of a god. But even here, under the silly chapter heading 'The Poverty of Agnosticism', he places himself on a level of 6 "but leaning towards 7", the strongest category of atheist. "I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden." -ROMANSH: Apparently ancient Romans and Greeks used to call Jews and Christians atheists because they believed in a non existent God.-Another instance of arrogant intolerance (which of course Dawkins shares with his fellow fundamentalists in most of the religions he attacks). Deuteronomy, Chapter 13, instructs that any prophet who suggests serving other gods should be put to death, and we all know the bloodthirsty history of Christianity and Islam, in which even members of different sects murder one another for having different views of the same God! Sacks is right in that religion builds communities, but it is just as divisive as it is unifying.