Most scientists don’t study purpose, but psychologists do.  If the cake had “Happy Birthday” written on it, one wouldn’t have to be much of a psychologist to realise that it was intended as a birthday present.  Similarly, if it had cyanide in it, one could reasonably conclude that the baker was intending to kill the cake’s recipient.  So the cake argument does look rather half-baked!

To truly understand the motivation behind “The God Delusion” please read what St Paul has to say in I Corinthians I verses 18-31 ("Christ the power and the wisdom of God"):

“(23) As for us,we proclaim the Crucified Christ,a message that is offensive to the jews and nonsense to the Gentiles..”

St Paul, the former enemy of Jesus, now empowered by GOD’s Spirit makes it perfectly clear that the message of the cross is “(18)..nonsense to those who are being lost; but for us who are being saved it is GOD’S power”. The greatest delusion of all is to misuse the God-given gift of reason to reject the truth.

“And so God sends the power of error to work in them so that they believe what is false” 2 Thessalonians 2 v 11

The author of “The God Delusion” has effectively painted himself into a corner with a Nietzschean disregard for Christianity; Belief in God for me is a combination of an intelligent reading of scripture (objective truth) coupled with (subjective) personal experience. It requires Wisdom and Humility rather than cleverness (the great mistake of the humanists who have made REASON into a god). An obsession with trying to convince people that GOD is a delusion is of course itself a delusion; it is certainly not my understanding of Atheism (as a “failed former Atheist” it seemed to me that Agnosticism was more reasonable, until I read the Bible for myself).

The marvellous debate between Prof. Dawkins and Prof. Lennox in the great ‘GOD delusion debate"(2007) could neatly be summarized by JAMES 3 verse 13-18 ("The Wisdom from above").

If Intellectual Humility is the key to understanding GOD then Intellectual pride is the way to totally misunderstanding HIM. GOD is certainly real; If you could prove GOD exists using science, then of course your GOD-given free-will would be untenable.

To read the media in Australia, it is a fait accompli that Dawkins & Hitchens have WON - no more debate, God doesn’t exist (a bit like the theory of evolution); so it is refreshing, as a Christian, to find such a learned man, in pure mathematics, philosophy & theology going into the lion’s den of Unbelief and giving a fantastic account of himself. When I debate with athiests, the moral high ground is always taken because I - a loony Christian, has no real science or scientists to back up my beliefs. Not anymore, I now have a ‘living treasure’ in John Lennox to back me up in fighting the good fight. Thank God for you, Mr.Lennox!

What John Lennox says here makes total sense to me. Reading the posts further down it becomes clear that it does not make sense to everybody. But would there be ever anything that makes sense to everybody? If it makes sense to me, I can only try to explain why it does so. I can’t explain why it does not to others, because I am not them, I can’t see their reasons for that it does not make sense. We can only try to explain ourselves. What the partner in the conversation makes of it, is entirely up to him.
For instance, I don’t know what C.Serv means when he says that the Bible makes sense but is not true. May be, if he knows what is true, he may want to share it with mankind one day.
I can’t see why for Andy the cake analogy falls down. Lennox shows with it that the scientists cannot deduct Matilda’s intention by analysing the cake. Therefore they cannot deduct God’s intention by analysing God’s creation.
We all may express what we believe, but when it comes to proof we don’t get anywhere. Proof would be the ability to force someone else to believe. You can proof mathematic theorems, but nothing else really.
Terry thinks that the Bible is full of inconsistencies. The question is always: where are the inconsistencies? Are they the Bible’s, or Terry’s? Would scientists attribute inconsistencies to nature? No, they can only belong to a mind. And why are we always tempted to think that our fellow man harbours the inconsistency, not we ourselves? (For those who read the Bible: remove the beam in your own eye, before you offer to help remove the splinter in your brother’s.)
I for one enjoy Lennox’s arguments thoroughly. He is a profound thinker. He makes me think. I enjoy when he tells the truth how he sees it. He inspires me to find the truth by thinking myself. He could not really do anything else, and nobody else could do more.

Why yes, the bible quite often makes sense. It just happens to not be true. My claim that I am both the king of rock is easy enough to grasp by even a child, and has no logical inconsistencies but is false. Much like the claim that jesus is king of the universe, a ten year old can understand it but then laugh in your face about how silly that is. Just because the bible doesn’t say nothing but, x is y and x is not y does not mean its true.
On the same note those scientists were more than able to deduce the cake was designed by an intelligent force, strangely they have not done the same with our universe.

Hi Terry,

Just a thought concerning the bible, please read Matt 19:3-9! This is a good passage to analyze and consider! Why? Well, here we read about a few different characters, first Jesus, then the religious leaders, Pharisees, then Moses and his written record.

After reading this you have a number of options you must try to either prove or dis-prove these statements. Where do you start, can we disprove that Christ walked the earth, many historians state Jesus Christ indeed did, in fact even Albert Einstein said “I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”

Then what about the tradition of the Pharisees, well to doubt their tradition would be equal to doubting that the Jewish tradition ever started!

What about Moses! Again, the Muslim, Jewish and Christian traditions all believe in him. It seems that even Jesus Christ by saying “Did you not read...” regarded Moses’ writings as sound.

So where do we go from here? I would suggest that you continue to dis-credit the bible and in so doing you might find a few answers!

There are indeed different sources of information.  A whole host of them were written by middle eastern mystics 1400-2500 years ago with none being any more reasonable than another.  The cake baking analogy does fall down somewhat in that God (and possibly his saintly agents) have been interceding in the affairs of the world ever since he created it, supposedly to answer countless prayers (although not e.g. to eliminate pain and suffering.  His record appears entirely random). 
Analogously, aunt Matilda will be interfering with the cake and scientists would be able to understand something about her by the fingerprints and cuts that she leaves.  We don’t have such evidence in the real world of god’s fingerprints - I strongly suspect because there is no god.  And why does the universe exist?  For no particular reason at all - just like you and me.

I think it is interesting that so many secular thinkers have the burden to disprove the relevence and validity of Christianity.  This fact by itself is curious enough.  Scientists are naturally egotistical and have been searching for generations to unlock the mysteries of the universe; their motives are to achieve critical acclaim and their theories and data historically have many more inconsistencies than the Bible.  It is impossible to completely understand the mind of God.  Dr. Lennox’s example of baking a cake is thought provoking.  Another question I would like to ask the scientists examing the cake is:  “What qualities does this cake give us about the entity that created it?” The cake may possess certain personal preferences about it’s creator but we cannot completely understand the mind of the one who made it.

Thank God I am not a scholar!
I don’t let the OT Laws burden my reasoning only the freedom given me from those very laws by Jesus Christ. To use a question from Matthew which Christ put to his disciple’s, “are you that dull?” Christ removed the yoke (OT Laws and Covenants) so we could worship God without the stain of sin. It has nothing to do with the affairs of man only the affairs of the spirit. We are all guilty under the Law and if we break the laws of man we will be judged by our fellow man to be guilty and must suffer the sentence. The laws you are judged by may have come from religious doctrine or from the village idiot that happens to control you and your domain. You are making the same mistake the Apostles made. When Christ was betrayed and sent to die on the cross, where were his Disciples? They went into hiding so that they might escape the same condemnation as Christ. So you say why did they then later go forth and spread The Word knowing what awaited them? Which is certainly born out by the suffering and often violent deaths they all met. The only explanation is the Resurrection! Now they knew what he had done for all the world. It compelled them to seek out every path so that every ear would hear The Word! They also knew not every ear that heard would accept The Word, but it has not stopped the telling.

The Bible is full of contradictions and inconsistencies most of which cannot be explained away by an argument re poor or misleading translations - if it is supposed to be the inspired word of God, then logically God would have inspired the translators. I am beginning to understand the rationale for most of your other arguments for the existence of an all-powerful God, but an appeal to the authority of the Bible leaves me unswayed - it does contain some nice prescriptions for leading a moral life, but the rest is “Chariots of the gods” stuff.