« The God Delusion | Main | A reductionist Baptist identity »

Wednesday, January 10, 2007



Professor Dawkins - who hurt you so badly that you harbour so much hatred?


Brodie, what an excellent post. My first reaction was to ask a question like Fernando's, then saw it had been asked already, so........

Professor Dawkins, how many people who love this God with all their heart, mind and strength have you spent time with?


hold on - serious point - I hope and pray the answer to MY question is not related to the answer to FERNANDO'S question.....


Lynn & Fernando - I hear what both of you are saying and think that there may well be something in that. However, let me play the part of Dawkins for a moment,
"Who hurt me? You obviously did not read chapter one very well as I start by paying tribute to the chaplin at my school who like me had a deep love of the natural world,yet this led him to be a priest in the Anglican church. I'm not saying that religious people are unjust, vindictive, misogynistic, homophobic etc, although many of them are just watch the news of the protesters campaining against the Government's Sexual Orientation Regulation, I'm simply interacting with the Old Testament and describing the God I find in it's pages".


"Mr Dawkins, I used to think that too. Until I met him."


And tell me Richard, when you read the OT, how would you describe mankind?


Talkrhubarb - witha comment like that if I were Dawkins I'm not sure I'd stay for coffee!


Phil - I would imagine Dawkins might reply, "as unpleasent as their fictional God, but after all they were deluded".


I'd ask if he wanted to have a conversation that honoured and respected me rather than treated me as delusional for believing in God. Since I harbour no ill will toward him and would consider his views in a respectful manner, I'd appreciate the same. If he began by insulting the God I worship (as the quote does)...and thus in effect making a statement about me, then it's likely he is not a person of peace and I'd shake the dust off and excuse myself politely.

I agree with Lynn that something/someone has wounded him that he sees it as his mission to combat or refute Christianity. Very much the same thing that the extreme creationists do when they attack him. It's a defensive response that is now developed into an attack. The inflamatory statements, belittling words, etc. are not gentle and are used to provoke rather than understand.


Your comments attempt to describe "the God of the Old Testament"... I'm not sure that this is the best way to start.

let me illustrate...
"'The Jamie of late December 2006' is a lazy, gluttonous, good-for-nothing, spendthrift, consumerist, agoraphobic, alcoholic turkeycidal maniac."

I'm sure you could take one chapter of any of our lives' stories (including yours Professor Dawkins) and make equally false deductions about our characters.

Surely, Professor Dawkins, we should begin by discussing the God of the whole Bible, the whole story of God?

Instead of playing thesaurus ping-pong, let's talk about the whole trajectory, the whole story.

Sure there are some really tough chapters to this story (which I don't get by the way) but, having said that, any God who creates in the first place (he didn't need to) and engages with that creation (Old Testament) must be a condescending, patient, suffering, relational being...

[Dawkins is probably asleep by now due to long response]


Jamie - on the contary I think Dawkins just woke up.


<<'The Jamie of late December 2006' is a lazy, gluttonous, good-for-nothing, spendthrift, consumerist, agoraphobic, alcoholic turkeycidal maniac.">>

Brodie, I am loving this thread!!

rodney neill

On Tueday night I went to a Last Supper(12 people who have a meal and discuss theological subject with a guest speaker) at Ikon ( Befast based emerging church group) where the guest speaker was a militant atheist in the Dawkins mold who insulted RC church, told us our faith was delusional and irrational etc - later on in the night we all relaxed our guards and had a better exchange of views but it was very difficult!!



I understand people being offended, but what he said is actually backed up by what is in the bible.
God did do all that stuff and has all the attributes described.


Paul - thanks for your comment. In my post I asked what you might say to Dawkins. Are you saying, "God did what you say and has these attributes, just because you don't like him is not evidence that he does not exist?"


Is this like when I started to read Tess of the D'Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy and gave up because it was too bleak and depressing, therefore assuming all Thomas Hardy stuff is bleak and depressing? OK bad example, but you get what I mean.
Some people would go so far as to say that since God existed before during and after both the Old and New Testaments, is still existing now, and will continue to exist in the future, it can't possibly be the whole story.
That doesn't even begin to account for all the billions of different viewpoint of God throughout the world...

The comments to this entry are closed.