EXPLAIN THE ARGUEMENTS FROM SCIENCE FROM DAWKINS AND THE OBJECTIONS TO THEM FROM LENNOX.

Authors Avatar

EXPLAIN THE ARGUEMENTS FROM SCIENCE FROM DAWKINS AND THE OBJECTIONS TO THEM FROM LENNOX.

Richard Dawkins argues that faith is blind and science is evidence based. He says that there is no scientific evidence of God. He argues that science seeks the truth through logical and scientific evidence, whereas religion teaches people to be satisfied without understanding. God provides a facile; something that’s easily achieved or effortless and apparent explanation. It’s natural to be in fascination and amazement of the universe and religion has personified the universe, calling it God. Science he argues frees us from this “mistake”.

John Lennox the Christian mathematician objects by agreeing that some faith is blind and can be dangerous whether it’s religious or secular. Faith demands evidence and because it demands so much trust and commitment. He says faith in delusional idols is expressly banned in the bible. Believers he says take their evidence from history, science and experience. Furthermore he says that we cannot speak of absolute proof, except in maths. Elsewhere we have to be content with evidence. What lies beyond science is not irrational; there are also important things like morality, which science cannot provide.

Join now!

 Dawkins then argues that science supports atheism, not Christianity. He was influenced by Darwinism and the ideas of Charles Darwin. Scientific methods are the only way to check the truth. Miracles are an important one where the virgin birth of Jesus from Mary lacks DNA and logical evidence. There is no evidence to support the God hypothesis.

Lennox on the other hand asserts that science undermines atheism. Science believes in a rational intelligibility of the universe, it recognises laws. Atheism sees man and his intelligence as cobbled together by the universe. Why should we rely therefore on man’s conclusion ...

This is a preview of the whole essay