An invitation and challenge to Fiske Miles
While surfing the web tonight I came across your Blog post on your site, FiskeMiles.com
, about how you stepped down as discussion leader for The God Delusion
here at BookTalk. This post is an open invitation for you to participate in the discussion even without holding the position of discussion leader. I'm not sure why you walked completely away from the discussion, but maybe your below comments will give us a better idea.
I've also been surprised to find my sympathies (and arguments) primarily aligned with the theists, or at least agnostics, participating in the discussion. The dogmatic views expressed by many of the atheists are strident, intolerant, and simplistic in much the same way as views expressed by religious fundamentalists. Eagleton alludes to this militant atheist attitude in his review. When all is said and done, God's non-existence is no more subject to proof than His existence. Either position is a matter of belief, not knowledge, and ought best to be treated with a certain amount of skepticism and caution. At least that's what I think. People who believe God exists are no more deluded than people who believe He doesn't. And frankly, nothing has shaken my confidence in atheism more than discussing it with this group of atheists.
Fiske, just about everything that comes out of your mouth leads me to suspect that you're a closet theist masquerading as an atheist. When the day comes for you to "come out of the closet" what a powerful testimony it will be for the strength of the word of the lord. It got you to turn your back on the dogmatic ignorance and arrogance of atheism!
I might be wrong, but I've received numerous emails from members with the same prediction or theory about your game plan. And I do hope we're wrong because it'll make me feel like a gullible chump for getting sucked into the whole scheme. Not to mention that I do think you're a bright and articulate person. Having you in the atheist camp seems
like an asset.
My experiences with atheists and atheism lead me to believe that you either didn't read The God Delusion
in it's entirety or you went into the reading already extremely biased against Richard Dawkins and his agenda
. Your arguments, in my opinion, lack sophistication, yet you do well at packaging them beautifully by the way you manipulate the English language. This is in some ways a compliment and in others a critique. It's a wonderful skill or talent to be able to sell yourself or your message to an audience, but when you're pushing a lemon it needs to be known.
I'm truly curious what essays or articles you've written about atheism. And I mean at any time in your life, not just on your current Blog. I'd love to read anything you've authored that defends atheism.
According to your Blog, located at FiskeMiles.com
, your writing there is about...
2. bird watching
...but when we look at your index of articles, found on your site map
page, you seem to skip over offering articles on atheism. I can't help but wonder why this is.
And this is what really makes me believe you're not an atheist:
God's non-existence is no more subject to proof than His existence. Either position is a matter of belief, not knowledge, and ought best to be treated with a certain amount of skepticism and caution. At least that's what I think. People who believe God exists are no more deluded than people who believe He doesn't. And frankly, nothing has shaken my confidence in atheism more than discussing it with this group of atheists.
This line of reasoning is so ridiculous and unsophisticated that I'm bewildered you even made it to discussion leader status on BookTalk. To be honest I'm frustrated with myself and my screening process. So I appreciate you stepping down as discussion leader. I really do.
I suppose Dawkins failed to make his point with you about the celestial teapot. To you the position that the teapot doesn't exist is just as much a "belief" as the position that it does exist. What about basic probability? When the probability of a "belief" being true approaches 100% is it to be grouped into the same category as those beliefs with a .0000000001% probability of being true? I mean, heck, a belief is a belief is a belief. Right? Are people who believe the celestial teapot to be nonsense just as deluded as the people that worship the celestial teapot? You don't see a significant difference?
Fiske, you're either a theist and you lied to us or you're purposely hiding the true nature of your "atheism." I'd love to hear an explanation of your beliefs and like to see a few of your articles on atheism. Something tells me that they don't exist or that you'll have excuses for why you won't stoop to addressing this challenge.
And frankly, nothing has shaken my confidence in atheism more than discussing it with this group of atheists.
This sounds like the first signs of labor pains as a Christian is about to be born again. How wonderful it will be to have your future blog posts talk of your conversion from atheism to theism. It is almost as if you are laying the foundation.
Sorry Fiske, but I'm sounding annoyed only because I am. You've insulted our community and me indirectly. If you're an atheist I'd like to hear the reasons why. And if I've read you wrong I'll apologize with no reservations.
So let this stand as an invitation and challenge to explain your version of atheism and provide some of your articles on the subject of atheism. Edited by: Chris OConnor at: 3/10/07 1:07 pm