Friday, December 19, 2008

Critique of The God Delusion

Recently, there have been a spate of books written by atheists attempting to debunk both Christianity and a belief in God. Make no mistake, Christianity is the enemy here. If the God of Christianity does exist, then that places a responsibility on each individual that comes to that realisation. That would mean that sin exists and, with it, all its consequences - both temporal and eternal.

Critique of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

by Philip Bell

The title of this book immediately betrays the bias of the author—even for those unacquainted with the writings of this Professor of the (so-called) Public Understanding of Science of Oxford University, Richard Dawkins. Just to skim the chapter contents is to give one a forewarning of what to expect. For instance, Chapter 1 is entitled ‘A deeply religious believer in no God.’ Chapter 4: ‘Why there almost certainly is no God.’ Chapter 7 is ‘The ‘Good’ Book and the changing moral Zeitgeist’—showing Dawkins’ absolute dislike of the message of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures. More provocatively still, the ninth chapter is ‘Childhood, abuse and the escape from religion.’ The single appendix is ‘a partial list of friendly addresses, for individuals needing support in escaping from religion.’

So much for any attempt at balance and objectivity—this book is certainly not a disinterested search for truth and is devoid of any careful weighing of evidence, for and against his thesis. Rather, it is this author’s most polemical work to date, that of a man driven by an unholy zeal to depose the God he claims to disbelieve in but transparently hates.

‘I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented.’ (p. 36: emphasis added in all quotes unless otherwise stated)

However, he takes pains to inform his reader that his venom is mostly reserved for monotheistic forms of God and one in particular:

‘Unless otherwise stated, I shall have Christianity mostly in mind, but only because it is the version with which I happen to be most familiar. … I shall not be concerned at all with other religions such as Buddhism or Confucianism.’ (p. 37)

Read the rest of the ARTICLE.

No comments: