Richard Dawkins interviewed by Piers Morgan says nobody knows what existed at the very beginning but that it's rong to postulate a god to explain it. But we don't postulate god, who says we postulate God? Only Dawkins and other atheists I suppose. The God of Christianity, and Judaism, reveals Himself in the Bible which is the history of His doings on this planet and in relation to His favorite creation, us. Ham beings. Nobody is merely postulateing God. We are convinced of the reality of God as He has revealed Himself to us in His Word and it holds together very well so we keep[ confirming His reality the more we read it and understand it. Dawkins has no clue to any of thta. And even if you are talkinga bout the other gods known to humanity none of them was postulated, they were experienced. Nobody merely postulates gods. Or angels or demons. There is alays some kind of evidence, some of it erhaps rather questionable bvut nevertrheless it's evidence. Novodsy merely poyustulates these things.
So Dawkins claims we have no evidence. Axctgually we have a lot of evidence, he just doesn't klike our evidence, it doesn't convince him. Nevertheless there is a lot of it in tghe history of humanity as described int the Bible. If you let your own unbelief reject it all as some kind of fiction then of course it becomes useless for evidence, but if you take it at its word, on its own terms, then there's a ton of evidenece in it.
And as I keep saying here, Dawkins can't appreciate evidence of this sort. He's like doubting Thomsas you hwas to see it to believe it. Jesus chidend Thomsas for his rejectionjof what he'd been told by his ffriends about the reality of Christ's having bee raised from the dead, and so we can chide Dawkins but of course he will go on believing in his own unblibef because he needs a kind of evidencde tthat is simply tnot avilable for the kinds of things he wants eivdnece for. You have to trust the testimony of others abut of course those others are just stupid in his eyeseveryone int eh Bible itself and all the millions of us who believe it, all stupid.
I couldn't believe either, until I was in my mid forties. Then I just believed what I was reading in books written by Christians. They were convfincing. But I was also having supernatural experiences \, of a demonic sort as I came to understand later, but supernatural for sure and that has its own compelling power.
Now I think it wvery strange tht people don't recognize God in a million ways in nature and reality, but I myself didn't recognize Him so I know it doesn't happen even if it should. I also think it's obvious that evolution can't possibly have happened, simply by contemplating the nature of living things, without even bothering with any of the arguments I spent so much time thinking out, but again apparently it's easy for all of us to ignore tall that too.
I don't like how Piers Morgan deals with the quetion either thought, or how he deals with Dawkins. He's not the right person to bge interviewing him, he makes it all more confusing and actually rather unpleasant than it needs to be. And he seems to be relying mostly on some sort of reasoning instead of on revelation. Well hisr source is Catholicisim I gather and he really dones't know what he belives just that there is God and there is an eternity we're all going to live in and it's all bliss or something like that. Based on nothing. In this case I'm with Dawkins, where's the evidence for any of that? Piers isn't saved, judging by what he's saying, so if anyone is boing to be surprised upon death it's going to be Piers, and not happily surprised. Now I have to pray for him too not just dawkins.
