a
"He loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of the lovingkindness of the Lord."
Psalm 33:5
| Live Weak (1/25/2010) | |
| The Myth of Noah's Ark? (1/15/2010) | |
| He Made The Stars...Also (12/30/2009) |
You are here: Home 
Articles 
The God Delusion (Part 4)
The God Delusion (Part 4)
When I originally sat down to write this article, I was not sure how to go about it. While reading The God Delusion, I was constantly taking notes on different claims Dawkins made, and on what page he made them on. By the time I was done, I had so many notes I was not sure how to organize it all into an article. I didn’t want to do it by chapter, because there were some portions of the book I did not think required a comment. So, I decided to break it down into two ‘sections’, the two I think Dawkins concentrated on the most: belief in God and morality. Unfortunately, all of my notes did not fall into one of these categories. Because of this, this final section will consist of other things I would like to mention, but didn’t feel could be placed in with the topics of God and morality. With that said, again, let’s jump into this final ‘random information’ section.
Dawkins rightly points out some sad truths of many televangelists today. In his preface, he rightly observes that there are:
“Shiny-suited bouffant-haired televangelists fleecing gullible people of their money (‘God wants you to give till it hurts’).”
He also references a specific instance of this happening:
“The aptly named Oral Roberts once told his television audience that God would kill him unless they gave him $8 million. Almost unbelievably, it worked.”
Indeed, there are many examples of things like this happening. Preachers use fear and enthusiastic speech to trick people into giving money, instead of preaching the gospel like the Bible tells them to do. The Bible talked about these kinds of men long before ‘televangelists’ even existed. Second Peter 2:1-3 says, “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies [God will kill me unless you give me $8 million?], even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction among themselves. Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their greed they will exploit you with false words [God will kill me unless you give me $8 million?]; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.”
In his chapter “The roots of morality: why are we good?” Dawkins writes:
“I receive a large number of letters from readers of my books, most of them enthusiastically friendly, some of them helpfully critical, a few nasty or even vicious. And the nastiest of all, I am sorry to report, are almost invariably motivated by religion. Such unchristian abuse is commonly experienced by those who are perceived as enemies of Christianity.”
He goes on to provide a couple examples of these nasty letters. Some of them were written to fellow atheists Dawkins respects, and others were written directly to him. Atheist, agnostic, Dr. Dawkins, on behalf of all Bible believing Christians, I sincerely apologize for these horrific letters. One of the examples showed a man (claiming to be a Christian) say he’d, “love to take a knife, gut you fools [atheists], and scream with joy as your insides spill out in front of you.” The man goes on to say he finds comfort in, “knowing that the punishment God will bring to you will be 1000 times worse than anything I can inflict.” I do not care what a person says or does. It does not matter if they are anti-Christian or not, the very thought of anybody going to Hell horrifies me, and I would not wish that fate on anybody. I am in full agreement with C.S. Lewis when he said:
“There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than the doctrine of Hell, if it lay in my power. But it has the full support of scripture and especially, of our Lord’s own words; it has always been held by the Christian church, and it has the support of reason.”
However, my hope that none go to Hell does not change the fact that it is happening. That is why we must preach the gospel, just like the Bible commands us (Mark 16:15). To any atheist who may be reading this, letters like the one mentioned above are not Biblical, and I would venture to say could not possibly be written by a true, born-again, Bible believing Christian. The Bible tells us that hate is the same as murder (Matthew 5), and is an abomination to the Lord. This is not the only letter Dawkins provided, and as I read each example my jaw dropped. Such filth should not come from somebody who claims the name of Christ.
As I have mentioned elsewhere in the article, Dawkins is not always (rarely, in fact) good at using hermeneutical practices to understand scripture. So much so, he even goes so far as to say, “Those who wish to base their morality literally on the Bible have either not read it or not understand it”. I found this quote ironic considering two things. First, I have read the Bible, and still consider it my ultimate and only reliable source on morality and how I should live my life. Second, how can Dawkins possibly criticize those who do not understand what the Bible teaches, considering the sheer lack of understanding he has of Biblical Christianity? I have mentioned some examples throughout the article, but many more remain. For example, after a very poor and sadly misinformed description of atonement and forgiveness of sins as Christianity teaches (I will discuss this in a moment), Dawkins proudly announces,
“I have described atonement, the central doctrine of Christianity, as vicious, sado-masochistic and repellent…If God wanted to forgive sins, why not just forgive them, without having himself tortured and executed in payment…”
His question shows a complete lack of understanding of the Biblical nature of the Lord. I could write for hours on this topic, but will reference it only briefly here. If a man has murdered 5 people, can a good, just judge simply let him go? Of course not. If the judge did take such an action, he would be corrupt, not just. One of my favorite quotes (sadly, I do not know who originally said it) explains, "It is because God's wrath is real, that his mercy is relevant. Unless you have a real wrath, a real anger, the biblical concepts of long-suffering, of mercy, and of grace, are robbed of their meaning.” (Alistair Begg)
However, his lack of understanding of Christian doctrine does not stop there. The only way to explain how I felt while reading this portion of the book (“The ‘good’ book and the changing moral Zeitgeist”) is by saying two things. First, I was very sad that Dawkins had such a misinformed view of the doctrines of Christianity. But second, I really did feel like I was banging my head against a wall. There is no other way to put it. Consider the following quotes from Dawkins:
“…but there are other teachings in the New Testament that no good [there’s that word again] person should support. I refer especially to the central doctrine of Christianity: that of ‘atonement’ for ‘original sin’. This teaching, which lies at the heart of the New Testament theology, is almost as morally obnoxious as the story of Abraham setting out to barbecue Isaac, which it resembles”
Do you see the complete lack of respect he has for scripture? “Barbecue Isaac”? He continues, and doesn’t let up for one second,
“New Testament theology adds a new injustice, topped off by a new sadomasochism whose viciousness even the Old Testament barely exceeds.”
He goes on to mock the idea that Christians, “should adopt an instrument of torture and execution as its sacred symbol, often worn around the neck.” (Once again, showing his complete lack of understanding of the doctrine of sin. Which is interesting, considering he again mocks Christians by saying they are overwhelmed by, “sin sin sin sin sin sin sin.” He appears to know it is a core doctrine, yet neglects to understand what the Bible has to say about it.) His mockery of scripture and misrepresentation of different Bible accounts could be written about for days. I think I have provided enough for the point to get across, so we shall now move on.
Dawkins only seems to reference Jesus as an actual person when throwing out violent insults. When complimenting Jesus for His teachings which are valid (in the eyes of Dawkins) he opens by saying, “Jesus, if he existed…” Why would someone make such a statement about a historically proven fact? How would people react if I wrote an article and said, “Assuming George Washington actually existed…”? I could write the evidences of Jesus’s existence here (although, it is a shame the topic is even debated. The topic of whether Jesus existed or not, based on historical evidence, is not even one of debate), but I will refrain from doing so for now. Perhaps another article, another day.
I could continue to go on and on for pages about the shocking and, for the most part inaccurate things Dawkins said in The God Delusion. Comments such as, “Christianity, just as much as Islam, teaches children that unquestioned faith is a virtue,” “I am persuaded that the phrase ‘child-abuse’ is no exaggeration when used to describe what teachers and priests are doing to children whom they encourage to believe in something like the punishment of unshriven mortal sins in an eternal hell,” and “The very sound of the phrase ‘Christian child’ or ‘Muslim child’ should grate like fingernails on a chalkboard.” But, I will try to conclude here. I hope that this article has been helpful to you, and that you feel like you have a grasp on the things atheists are saying, without having to sit through all 374 pages of The God Delusion. Despite all of the historically inaccurate, misleading, and flat out wrong things Dawkins said in the book, he did say one thing that struck me rather hard. In his chapter entitled, ‘What’s wrong with religion? Why be so hostile?’ he tells his readers:
“My passion is increased when I think about how much the poor fundamentalists, and those whom they influence, are missing. The truths of evolution, along with many other scientific truths, are so engrossingly fascinating and beautiful; how truly tragic to die having missed out on all that! Of course that makes me passionate.”
The point that can be drawn from that paragraph I think is self-explanatory. If there is one thing I respect about Richard Dawkins it is this: he knows what he believes, and he is not afraid to stand up for it. Many Christians cannot honestly claim the same conviction. “how truly tragic to die having missed out on all that!” Indeed, how truly tragic it will be to walk off into eternity without the Savior. Can you say with the same conviction Dawkins has, “of course that makes me passionate.”?
I said at the beginning of this article I did enjoy reading through The God Delusion for a couple reasons. First, as mentioned above, I feel a couple of his comments and points testified to scripture. I think some Christians, when they see a man as radical an ‘atheist’ as Dawkins, wonder about verses like Romans 1:20. Some may think things such as, “He is so anti-God, creation must not have testified to him like the Bible says it would.” But, the Bible is universal, and it does apply to everyone. And Dawkins proves it with his comments on design, and morality. The second reason I thoroughly enjoyed the book is because atheists have made such a big deal about it. After reading through it, I am beyond convinced that atheists have absolutely nothing. They have no arguments, they have no points. If this is the book atheists are choosing as “brilliant” and “the book of the century” what claims could atheist authors who aren’t as hailed possibly be saying? Certainly nothing more “powerful” than what Dawkins puts forth. This, it seemed to me, was the one book atheists have chosen to represent their belief in the irrationality of God. Needless to say, even their best is nowhere near good enough.