William A. Dembski Quotes

My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them.

My practice as a scientist is atheistic. That is to say, when I set up an experiment I assume that no god, angel, or devil is going to interfere with its course; and this assumption has been justified by such success as I have achieved in my professional career. I should therefore be intellectually dishonest if I were not also atheistic in the affairs of the world.

It is often said that science must avoid any conclusions which smack of the supernatural.

If the ignorance of nature gave birth to gods, the knowledge of nature is calculated to destroy them.

I don't believe in a personal God, no. And I don't believe in resurrection as it is in the New Testament.

I went through the standard scientific atheist phase when I was about 14. I bought into that package deal of science equals atheism.

There is a class, moreover, by whom all these scientific theories, and more are held as ascertained facts, and as the basis of philosophical inferences which strike at the root of theistic beliefs.

Atheism has been on the rise for years now, and the Bible of the atheists is 'The Origin of Species.'

I have endeavored to dissipate these religious superstitions from the minds of women, and base their faith on science and reason, where I found for myself at last that peace and comfort I could never find in the Bible and the church.

One of the greatest gifts science has brought to the world is continuing elimination of the supernatural.

When men stop believing in God, it isn't that they then believe in nothing: they believe in everything.

Irreligion - the principal one of the great faiths of the world.

I have no beliefs of a religious kind.

I don't believe in God.

To philosophical materialists God is no more than an idea in the human mind, and not a very important idea.

If we take science as our sole guide, if we accept and hold fast that alone which is verifiable, the old theology must go.

I don't bill myself as an atheist but as a naturalist. Naturalism is a belief system. A lot of scientists bristle at that. We all have to believe we can find the truth. Evidence is my guide. I rely on observation, experimentation and verification.

How can you be an atheist and have an ideology to go with it? To be an atheist is to be free of some areas of belief. I don't see how that can become an ideology.

Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is 'The Book of British Birds,' and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology.

An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support.

The split between religion and science is relatively new. Isaac Newton, who first worked out the laws by which gravity held the planets and even the stars in their traces, was sufficiently impressed by the scale and regularity of the universe to ascribe it all to God.

I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - this is a somewhat new kind of religion.

I think the appropriate response for a physicist is: 'I do not find the concept of God very interesting, because I cannot test it.'

I think I like big issues, but I don't believe in God or religion.

From the point of view of many scientists, gods represent an explanation for the unknown. Scientists are focused on trying to understand the unknown, so there is a fundamental conflict. That said, some scientists find religion useful and perhaps even fulfilling.