Richard Dawkins Quotes

Does God exist? Well, I would say, 'not yet'.

We cannot start with God and deduce the universe from his existence; we must start with the world as we know it, and deduce God from the world.

Great God in Boots! – the ontological argument is sound!

Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formatted, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God.

We cannot prove that there is no God, but we can safely conclude the He is very, very improbable indeed.

If there be an infinite Being, he does not need our help - we need not waste our energies in his defense.

If there is a God, he is a malign thug.

If by some bizarre chance there turns out to be a god [...], I'm willing to bet he's an atheist too.

The hypothesis of God offers no worthwhile explanation for anything, for it simply postulates what we are trying to explain.

God's existence needs to be established independently before he can be brought into account for causation; it cannot be assumed at the start.

If God exists, there's no way he's French

Question boldly even the existence of God.

Some theists, observing that all 'effects' need a cause, assert that God is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove.

Either there is a God or there isn't. Both possibilities are frightening.

If people think God is interesting, the onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about. Otherwise they should just shut up about it.

I have hitherto followed the lines marked out by the Theist in his attempt to prove that there exists a mind behind natural phenomena, and that the universe as we have it is, at least generally, an evidence of a plan designed by this mind. I have also pointed out that the only datum for such a conclusion is the universe we know. We must take that as a starting point. We can get neither behind it nor beyond it. We cannot start with God and deduce the universe from his existence; we must start with the world as we know it, and deduce God from the world.

The proofs of the existence of God are to such an extent fallen into discredit that they pass for something antiquated, belonging to days gone by.

I am, therefore there is a God.

The orthodox believers in God are divided into two camps, one of which maintains that the existence of God is as demonstrable as any mathematical proposition, while the other asserts that his existence is not demonstrable to the intellect.

Back when the natural sciences, philosophy, and theology were one great intellectual hodgepodge, proving the existence of God was a relatively commonplace exercise. To the modern mind, however, science and religion talk past each other.

If it were proven that there is no God there would be no religion. ...But also if it were proven that there is a God, there would be no religion.

The existence of God is not subjective. He either exists or he doesn’t. It’s not a matter of opinion. You can have your own opinions. But you can’t have your own facts.

Through Plato, Aristotle came to believe in God; but Plato never attempted to prove His reality. Aristotle had to do so. Plato contemplated Him; Aristotle produced arguments to demonstrate Him. Plato never defined Him; but Aristotle thought God through logically, and concluded with entire satisfaction to himself that He was the Unmoved Mover.

If we say that God has always been, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always been?