The Dawkins Delusion
"I do not, by nature, thrive on confrontation," declares Richard Dawkins, the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University and one of the world's leading skeptics concerning Christianity and belief in God.
by R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Christian Today Guest Columnist
Posted: Sunday, October 28, 2007, 16:13 (GMT)
At the same time, he suggests that the morality revealed in the Bible is actually immoral when judged against the enlightened standards of our current moral Zeitgeist. Furthermore, Dawkins argues that modern persons do not actually derive their morality from the Bible, no matter how much they may claim to do so.
In a sweeping rejection of biblical Christianity, Dawkins expresses outrage at the morality of both the Old and New Testaments. "I have described atonement, the central doctrine of Christianity, as vicious, sado-masochistic and repellant. We should also dismiss it as barking mad, but for its ubiquitous familiarity which has dulled our objectivity," he asserts. Dawkins would dispense with the Ten Commandments and replace these with a new set of commandments more attuned to modern times. Among his proposed commandments are these: "Enjoy your own sex life (so long as it damages nobody else) and leave others to enjoy theirs in private whatever their inclinations, which are none of your business;" "Do not discriminate or oppress on the basis of sex, race or (as far as possible) species." Another of Dawkins' commandments hits close to home: "Do not indoctrinate your children. Teach them how to think for themselves, how to evaluate evidence, and how to disagree with you."
Amazingly, Dawkins denies that he is himself an absolutist. Accordingly, he expresses incredulity at the fact that he is seen as a particularly ardent opponent of Christianity.
"Despite my dislike of gladiatorial contests, I seem somehow to have acquired a reputation for pugnacity towards religion. Colleagues who agree that there is no God, who agree that we do not need religion to be moral, and agree that we can explain the roots of religion and of morality in non-religious terms, nevertheless come back to me in gentle puzzlement. Why are you so hostile?"
Dawkins denies that he is a "fundamentalist atheist." "Maybe scientists are fundamentalists when it comes to defining in some abstract way what is meant by 'truth.' But so is everybody else," he insists. "I am no more fundamentalist when I say evolution is true than when I say it is true that New Zealand is in the southern hemisphere."
Have your say on this article
The comments below are readers' personal opinions and are in no way intended to reflect the editorial opinion of Christian Today.
Added: Wednesday, October 31, 2007, 20:40 (GMT)
John you are frank as are you all. I see just three replies. One says believe what you like im with G-d (maybe not so politely) and two who say you cant believe in G-d we say he dosent exist(not very politely). The two of you cant prove him wrong and he says believe what you like so why fight?
Next you will be looking for someone to blame for all the stress? Do you not feel bad for ganging up on someone you claim is of less intelligence. I Hope you all find some peace. Then consider physicist Robert Gentry and radio halos. At the same time Sumarian knowledge of a Great Year Dout many know what that is even now? Then How the moon gets futher from the earth all the time yet in the past never got sucked in by gravity? How does each cell in your body do masses of complicated functions all the time with no brain? Dont stress! cheers.
gaz , uk
Added: Wednesday, October 31, 2007, 18:18 (GMT)
Dawkins is a strident apologist for atheism. Interestingly, by any measure evolution his backbone, is a straw man, it does not hold up to rigorous science and my own view is that his world view is part of the collective amnesia and dismissal of God by some scientists (note some as some scientists are believers) and ultimately he in the words of Shakespeare: 'doth protest too much'. This vehemence might in fact have the opposite effect and actually make people curious about God and the Bible (shades of Saul and Paul maybe here?). Anyway let us pray God may heal him of his own delusion sometime soon.
Dave de Courcey, Littlehampton United Kingdom
Added: Monday, October 29, 2007, 18:16 (GMT)
Just to point out an important inaccuracy in your piece. Richard Dawkins, along with the vast vast vast majority of the scientific world believes in the the theory of evoloution. All the evidence points to this being the best explanation as to how life has unfolded on earth. However, by Mr Dawkins own admission, he does not hold this belief dogmatically, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
No, if there was a better explanation of things backed up by better evidence and equal academic rigour, he'd drop evoloution for the new explanation. He's a scientist, he bases things on facts, evidence and the observable. None of which religion concerns itself with much.
Perhaps I'm just a sexual deviant aswell am I Frank?
john etteridge, Beccles, UK
Added: Monday, October 29, 2007, 17:42 (GMT)
The book has been out for a year now, so not only is it rather late, but all you seem to do is offer a few quotes from, along with a few snide comments. Even though you obviously disagree with its premise you offer not a single refutation of any of its points.
Frank from Oregon, your previous commenter, however is plainly rather exited about it, claiming first that Dawkins is a sexual deviant, and then proceeding to some unintelligble gibberish about how it doesn't matter what he says because god doesn't believe in him. Quite bizarre! If thats the level of intelligence shown by the typical believer, no wonder they have gained a reputation for having such low intellects.
Mark, Nottingham, UK
Added: Sunday, October 28, 2007, 17:32 (GMT)
Mr. Dawkins is free to believe whatever he desires, especially since his whole argument is so basic to the rebellion of most who chose to invalidate God to validate their own sinfullness. Obviously, he is a sexual deviant and is offended by the moral precepts of God so he spens his life trying to validate his own sins which must weigh very heavy on his heart so in rebellion he attacks the faith that uncovers his sin and demands repentance and submission. Ultimately, I would say to Mr. Dawkins not to worry God does not believe in athiest either. And if Mr. Dawkins does not believe in God it does not really matter whether God or Jesus exist, it does not matter whether he is going to heaven or hell as these terms are based on Christianity so if God does not exist neither do these.
Frank, Oregon, US
