Who is God?

I know someone will mention Richard Dawkins as an angry atheist. He's angry because of abuses done in the name of religion. He is angry about wrongdoing in the name of religion. He is angry about injustices in the name of religion. All this ia an entirely different matter from being angry because someone doesn,t believe something you believe and wishes to live their life a different way.

You aren't, I suppose, sick of people who get angry about child abuse, or angry about the abuse of workers by power-wielding bosses? What's the difference?

Child abuse and any kind of exploitation of individuals are bad and it's reasonable to get angry when not enough is being done about them. People believing in something you don't believe in is not the same. If the belief leads to wicked actions, get angry about the actions by all means. Don't get angry just because you/he thinks other people are stupid, misguided, misled or whatever. And Dawkins does. He isn't just angry about bad things done in the name of religion (why just religion? Why not political ideology or profit or arrogance?). It's religion that really gets him going. And that suggests that it has considerable importance to him. He's an evangelist, burning with the fire of righteousness. Scary!

here he is, for those who haven't seen this before.
Richard Dawkins, I mean. Not God

I think you may be wrong about him, lily. I happen to know that he has very religious friends in Oxford. It's what religion sometimes (often?) does to people that makes him angry. He doesn't have a problem with religious people who stay reasonable. It's the institutions and the effects they have that anger him. And should.

He is jolly offensive to perfectly harmless Christians (doesn't wax as angry with Jews and Moslems - wonder why not? ) and quite dismissive of the whole lot of us. "Some of his best friends are Christians" ? Purrlease!

PS Good one, jane. If that's him being angry I don't think we've anything to worry about

Having recently read his book 'The God Delusion' I found him to be reasoned, objective and methodical in the way he set out his views, and he didn't come across as angry in his writing. His framework to illustrate 6 categories of disbelief or atheism are interesting, and I think many more people would describe themselves as atheists if they were to consider his constructive points.

Yes he does get angry about Muslims and Jews. Check out some of his TV series "The root of all evil". He didn't choose the title, by the way, and argued against it but the Beeb didn't listen. I suspect that you are basing your criticisms an a very small "knowledge of Dawkins" base, lily.

Have you read any of his books, for instance? Somehow I doubt it, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Mea culpa! But when did you last read any theology, Bags ? I've at least seen Dawkins perform.

Who really says "mea culpa" these days?!

Or any days at all really.

I do. I just did!

[smile smile]

I mean in real life conversations!

When did you last?

Touché, lily . Does philosophy count?

Hey, pedants, especially French ones! Should that be touchée?

Oh Lordy, Lordy Miss Claudy I can see will have to get brushing up on the old Latin and French [coffee time]

I use mea culpa! Also nil desperandum!
And not a day goes by without me thinking gadiamus igitur!

Gaudiamus!

Nil desperandum's a good one!

Touche is fine - I haven't worked out how to do accents on my qwerty keyboard.
I say mea maxima culpa because I was brought up as a catholic and we used it in our prayers.

Carpe diem is the one I should be saying to myself.

And when the going gets tough... nil carborundum illegitimi

Non nobis solum.

That was our school motto.