Richard Dawkins upset that public doesn’t like him
God-hater says his attacks on religion are ‘thoughtful and reflective’
Published: 13 May 2014 (GMT+10)
Richard Dawkins contradicts himself during interview.
Misotheist Richard Dawkins feels unloved and misunderstood … and is bothered by it.
In an interview1 about the release of his memoir An Appetite For Wonder: The Making of a Scientist, Dawkins was concerned by the fact that the public had an unfavourable perception of him:
I seem to be perceived as aggressive and strident and I don’t actually think I am strident and aggressive. What I think is that we have all become so accustomed to seeing religion ring-fenced by a wall of special protection that when someone delivers even a mild criticism of religion, it’s heard as aggressive when it isn’t. I like to think I’m more thoughtful and reflective.
It’s not clear what Dawkins considers are his ‘thoughtful and reflective’ observations about religion because he has described it as a ‘virus of the mind’ and said parents giving children religious instruction were guilty of ‘child abuse’. That fits being aggressive and strident.
In response to a question about the connection between his work on evolution and attacks on religion, Dawkins again showed his prejudice against Christianity—and particularly young-earth creationists—with a straw-man argument:
So in a way even my science books are forced to take a stance, not against posh theologians who accept evolution but surely the absolute majority of religious people in the world who literally believe that every species was separately created and even, in the case of the Abrahamic religions, believe that Adam and Eve were created 6,000 years ago2. Chemists and other scientists don’t have to battle with that.3
If Dawkins insists he is not aggressive and strident, why then make such a wild claim that a majority of ‘religious people’ (presumably he means creationists too) believe in the ‘fixity of species’, in that God created all the species we see today?
Creationists don’t suggest that and have long pointed out that’s not what the Bible teaches in Genesis but rather it speaks clearly of God creating all kinds of organisms which reproduced ‘after their kind’.
Dr. Jonathan Sarfati explains:
Each of the original kinds was created with a vast amount of information. God made sure that the original creatures had enough variety in their genetic information so that their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of environments.4
As well, the ‘Abrahamic religion’ Islam does not hold to the same view of creation as that set forth in Genesis.5
Some Muslim apologists say the Koran is compatible with evolution where the Bible is not and that the Koran shows that Allah revealed to Muhammad details about the ‘big bang’, ancient universe and evolution long before scientists began to ‘discover’ such ‘facts’.6
And Dawkins cannot help himself with a reference to ‘posh theologians who accept evolution’ whom he excludes from his criticism but on a previous occasion said of such compromisers:
The moderates’ [liberals’] position seems to me to be fence-sitting. They half-believe in the Bible but how do they decide which parts to believe literally and which parts are just allegorical?7
The article’s author Andrew Anthony challenged Dawkins on why it was that his book The God Delusion, which was written in response to the September 11 attacks on America, turned into a ‘sustained critique of Christianity’.
Seemingly unimpressed by Dawkins’s reply that he knew more about Christianity as he was brought up in Christian schools, Anthony exposed the hypocrisy as well as his own bias:
All the same, it seemed a little perverse to be galvanised by the acts of followers of one religion to set about debunking the presumptions of another, especially as Christianity, particularly in Europe, and specifically in Britain, had become largely a toothless affair which had almost reformed itself out of existence. Did he really think that Christianity matters very much nowadays?8
Anthony also saw through Dawkins’s statement that ‘maybe it would be a shame if Christianity died’, by responding:
But then he goes on to insist that a more muscular and sinister version of Christianity is flourishing in many parts of the world.9
Dawkins’s contradictions are again on show when asked if Darwinism ‘informs his everyday apprehension of life’:
Well, in one way it does. My eyes are constantly wide open to the extraordinary fact of existence. Not just human existence but the existence of life and how this breathtakingly powerful process, which is natural selection, has managed to take the very simple facts of physics and chemistry and build them up to redwood trees and humans. That’s never far from my thoughts, that sense of amazement. On the other hand I certainly don’t allow Darwinism to influence my feelings about human social life.
The assertion that he doesn’t allow Darwinism to influence his feelings about human social life is nonsense given the energy he expends attacking creationists (in particular) whom he sees as a danger to science.
Because it is so ‘obvious’ that Darwin’s natural selection has caused redwood trees and humans, why does Dawkins bother with those in society who don’t come to the same conclusion? But Dawkins is so tied up in confused logic, he can’t see the leaves for the redwood trees. Informed Christians don’t come to the same conclusion for good reason—e.g., natural selection doesn’t produce information; it removes it.10
Dawkins makes no secret of the fact that he hates the very idea of God which again is contradictory; because how can an atheist hate someone that doesn’t—in their thinking—exist?
Perhaps creationist author Richard Barns was right to point out in The Dawkins Proof for the existence of God—that Dawkins lives as if the God of the Bible does exist. No wonder he’s so upset.
We would like to remind Richard that he is loved. We know of many Christians who regularly pray for him, that his heart will be softened and his eyes opened to the Creator God. And God loves him more than he can imagine. Richard, check this out: “But God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)
References and notes
- Richard Dawkins: ‘I don’t think I am strident or aggressive’, theguardian.com, 15 September 2013. Return to text.
- The book Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome demonstrates that the latest genetic data provides strong evidence supporting the fact that Adam and Eve were created 6,000 years ago. Return to text.
- Ref. 1. Return to text.
- Sarfati, J., Refuting Evolution 2, Creation Book Publishers, 2011. Return to text.
- Catchpoole, D., ‘The Koran vs Genesis’, Creation 24(2):46–51; creation.com/koran. Return to text.
- Ref. 4. Return to text.
- The root of all evil?, broadcast Channel 4, 16 January 2006. Return to text.
- Ref. 1. Return to text.
- Ref. 1. Return to text.
- See for example, The 3 Rs of Evolution: Rearrange, Remove, Ruin—in other words, no evolution!: The genetic changes observed in living things today could not have turned bacteria into basset hounds—ever. Return to text.
Richard Dawkins feeling unloved and misunderstood, does not think he is aggressive and strident? This is laughable-by what standard does he feel this way-his? If so, he's got no basis to as he's just a bunch of atoms which assembled in a particular way via evolution.
Hopefully he will one day repent and realise God loves him despite his rebellion against Him and His followers.
One wonders whether Dawkins deep down knows he is wrong but is too proud to admit it. He spends a lot of energy attacking those of us who believe the Bible is the ultimate authority.
Richard Dawkins , thoughtful and reflective when it comes to religion? If that were true he would at least have to be an agnostic about the existence of God in the face of Christian testimony of changed lives ( for the better). Why doesn't he stop and think 'Perhaps they know something that I don't know after all?'. One of the daftest things is that he is forced to admit that everything in creation has the 'appearance' of design. No wonder the Lord Jesus Christ said that even though one rose from the dead, some still would not believe. A little bit of humility and facing up to facts is required I think.
I am sure, if he can see consciously his last moment coming, that he will cry out to the Lord....just in case.
I think C: Richard Dawkins is like L. Ron Hubbard. The latter one was also disappointed that the public did not like him.
If Dawkins doesn't believe that he is aggressive and strident then he is deluded.
The one time I saw him on TV (on a Christian programme) he was smug, arrogant and wouldn't give answers to questions put to him, brushing them aside with comments like "there's plenty of evidence out there" without ever giving any of the out there evidence, and he didn't engage in a real discussion.
I concur with the sentiments shared in the last paragraph of Dawkins article. Let us all pray that the Holy Spirit of God convicts his heart that there is veracity only in the Word, and the word of God.
The positive atheists are on the spectrum of temperatures that Jesus prefers. They are cold, unlike the lukewarm Christians that are an object of distaste that Jesus said He would "Spew out of His Mouth".
The strident atheists care deeply about spiritual matters even as they deceive themselves about the most important facts in reality. They are actually closer to the truth than a marginal believer who never acts on his faith or considers what Jesus did for him.
"we have all become so accustomed to seeing religion ring-fenced by a wall of special protection"
Of course, Mr. Dawkins doesn't have a problem with his own religion -- the "science" of evolutionism -- being "ring-fenced by a wall of special protection" against being questioned!
Mr. Dawkins is spiritually blind. Is it any surprise he also is blind to self-convinced assertions that he is a non-hostile person? The Scriptures teach that a day of reckoning before the Lord Christ lies ahead for each one of us, including Mr. Dawkins, in which all excuses, assertions of moral goodness, and uninformed intentions will count for naught. While it is still called Today, Mr. Dawkins, I urge you to submit your life and will to the Lord Jesus Christ, Creator and Sustainer of all things.
Thank you for your article on Richard Dawkins. I often wonder of evolutionists consider the time you devote to showcasing his fallacies to be somewhat misused in that there are obviously thousands of others. But then, Dawkins would seem to be their figurehead. It amazes me how often he is so blind to his logical inconsistencies and self refuting arguments. I also find it interesting how you note that many people pray for him. This may sound shocking, but (to my knowledge) the Bible never actually calls for us to "pray for the lost". Rather it calls for prayer that God would send out workers. I believe your Ministry is an answer to that prayer, and those who reject your message model the rich young ruler. As far as I know, Jesus pretty much let him walk away after he rejected Jesus' instruction. So, is prayer for Dawkins time well spent?
The following Bible verses are so applicable to Richard Dawkins et al:
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." (Romans 1:22)
"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen." (Romans 1:25)
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (2 Th 2:11-12)
My advice to Richard Dawkins: read the Bible and read it thoroughly - without any bias or prejudice - and see how deluded you really are:
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
I appreciate the tenor of several of the comments, so far. My heart goes out to this man. Just take a few minutes to look deep into the face you have posted with this article. I see a man hurting to the core. My prayer is that his heart will find the strong, but gentle conviction of the Holy Spirit that will being him to his spiritual "knees" in full repentance, for His glory! Amen.
This is to be expected. As Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:14,
"But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
There is no amount of intellectual convincing that will draw Dr. Dawkins to God absent the Holy Spirit calling. That at the very least would be a worthwhile prayer. His fervency as an evangelist for Christ would be welcomed, amen?
To quote directly from Dawkins himself:
‘All I can say is, That’s just tough. We have to face up to the truth.’
Those who really believe the absence of God spend precious little time, if any, publicly denying His existence, and those like Dawkins who cannot speak without commenting on God's nonexistence merely endeavor to convince themselves.
I am just wondering about when you said "Dawkins makes no secret of the fact that he hates the very idea of God which again is contradictory; because how can an atheist hate someone that doesn’t—in their thinking—exist?" You said that Dawkins hates the very IDEA of God, not God. I hate the very IDEA of giant flying spiders, but I don't hate them, because I know they don't exist. Maybe Dawkins comes across as hating God (which I think is true), but did he ever SAY he hated God? And maybe he did, but it just wasn't quoted in this article. I'm just curious about this! Thanks :)
He certainly comes across as a God-hater and I think hating the very idea of God is the same thing. As well, there are probably many interviews that indicate how Dawkins feels about God. Have a read of "A man who believes in Darwin as fervently as he hates God" published at www.spectator.co.uk/ and decide for yourself.
If Dawkins took a rational approach to the Bible and of God, he wouldn't be making half of the "criticisms" that he currently makes against God. In fact, he would realize that the exact opposite of what he claims about God is true. And I am 100% positive that I can prove that point in a debate with Dawkins.
A while ago I saw a interview with Richard Dawkins on the AlJazeera tv-chanel He made a statement that he believes "mankind is getting better" I wished I could have asked him to explain. We might be getting more knowledgeable, but if he meant "good-er", as in good-better-best, I think he is does not live in the real world.
Perhaps somebody should tell Richard Dawkins that Christians do not "dislike" him per se, just the attitudes, words and actions that come from his atheistic world view. We are commanded to love even our enemies and I would hope that is the attitude of all Christians who are offended by Dawkins. It is not surprising that a person who labels those who do not agree with him as child abusers is disliked. That is the kind of behaviour that encourages prejudice, hate and even pogroms against dissenters from his point of view. We had enough of that from the Nazis and communists during the cold war, we certainly don't need it from Richard Dawkins.
I particularly liked this: "Chemists and other scientists don’t have to battle with that." In other words, true science does not have the same problem as his silly story telling. Amazing that operational science is consistent with a biblical view whilst his preconceived, untestable ideas are not.
I'm very curious why people like Mr Dawkins see to spend so much time & effort critiquing & debunking Christianity if they DONT believe in a creative loving God?! I liken it to arguing passionately against the tooth fairy or the Easter bunny! Why do people like Mr Dawkins feel so threatened by Christ! Why? Because it's true!
I most certainly believe that we should pray for Richard Dawkins as God commanded us:
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
Mat 5:45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
Dawkins "doth protest too much, methinks".
The great irony in Dawkins belief system is that the very rocks he throws at creationists only break the panes in his glass house.
Dawkins admits that in his early teens he came to the conclusion that Darwinism was true. He still refers to it with "wonder" and "awe". Sounds a bit religious, no? And no amount of science training has dissuaded him from his childhood beliefs.
At least with the science community at large many have allowed logic and proven fact enter into the equation, which is why many former atheists form the core of CMI.
By the way, read the article and the author's description of how Dawkins treats the photographer. Hmm.
Thank you for all these thoughtful comments. Can I just add one little thought?
'There, but for the GRACE of God, go I'.
In many respects, Jesus forewarned us about the character and deceptions of these last days -
therefore, we ought not to be surprised by the vehement reaction of the World to the Bible and Gospel. The apostle Peter encourages us to concentrate on making sure that we have sanctified Christ Jesus in our hearts ("Pt 1: 2-8), so that we are ready to give a consistent and concerted answer to those who ask a reason for the Hope that is within us, with meekness and fear. (1Pt 3:15). The Scriptures inform us that The LORD will defend His Word from the critics - who have come and gone off the scene of history (Ps 12: 6,7) because all flesh is as grass, but The WORD of The LORD abides forever (Is 40: 6-8). If anything, if Richard Dawkins or whoever opposes the Will of GOD had bothered to take account of history - they would realise that they were fighting a losing battle. Nevertheless, when these types of attacks / prejudices increase in the earth - it only in preparation for their final judgement and eradication (Ps 92: 5-7). So Jesus encourages us to "Lift up your heads, because your redemption draws nigh! (Lk 21: 25-28).