21.07.2013 Views

Dawkins' God Delusion Divorced American ... - Biola University

Dawkins' God Delusion Divorced American ... - Biola University

Dawkins' God Delusion Divorced American ... - Biola University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

BIOLA CONNECTIONS ❁ SPRING ’07 ASK AN EXPERT 07<br />

What Should Christians<br />

Know About The <strong>God</strong> <strong>Delusion</strong>?<br />

In The <strong>God</strong> <strong>Delusion</strong> (Houghton Mifflin, 2006),<br />

O<br />

Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins argues that<br />

belief in <strong>God</strong> is delusional and deadly. The book<br />

reached No. 2 on the Amazon.com best sellers list<br />

in November. It ridicules <strong>Biola</strong> <strong>University</strong> in a footnote<br />

on page 84 that notes former atheist Antony<br />

Flew’s acceptance of <strong>Biola</strong>’s “Phillip E. Johnson<br />

Award for Liberty and Truth.” <strong>Biola</strong> Connections<br />

asked Dr. Douglas Geivett — a <strong>Biola</strong> philosophy<br />

professor — to comment on the book.<br />

What’s Dawkins’ take on religion?<br />

Dawkins believes religion promotes immorality<br />

and threatens human survival — including hindering<br />

science, fostering homophobia and kindling<br />

fanaticism. The final chapters read like a<br />

manifesto for the eradication of a disease. The<br />

book is filled with scornful remarks against religion,<br />

like: “The <strong>God</strong> of the Old Testament is<br />

arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction:<br />

jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust,<br />

unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty<br />

ethnic-cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic,<br />

racist, infanticidal, genocidical, filicidal,<br />

pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic,<br />

capriciously malevolent bully” (page 31).<br />

How have people been “deluded”<br />

by religion, according to Dawkins?<br />

Dawkins claims that religious beliefs emerged<br />

through the evolutionary process, serving certain<br />

survival goals. Now, however, they have outlived<br />

their usefulness. He believes the brain constructs<br />

sensory experiences that people mistake as <strong>God</strong>.<br />

How does Dawkins respond to the<br />

traditional arguments for <strong>God</strong>’s existence?<br />

Dawkins responds with glib comebacks and<br />

simplistic arguments. He objects to cosmological<br />

arguments, suggesting that if <strong>God</strong> is required to<br />

explain the existence of the universe, then<br />

something else is required to explain the existence<br />

of <strong>God</strong>. But this is a mistake since <strong>God</strong> is selfsubsistent,<br />

whereas the universe is not. Dawkins<br />

calls the ontological argument “infantile.” But he<br />

hasn’t shown that the existence of <strong>God</strong> is<br />

impossible, and he doesn’t seem to understand<br />

that, according to contemporary versions of the<br />

ontological argument, if the existence of <strong>God</strong> is<br />

possible, then it’s also necessary.<br />

What does he do with the currently<br />

popular “Intelligent Design” arguments?<br />

Dawkins says the appearance of design in the<br />

universe is an illusion that can be explained by<br />

evolution, with one important qualification. At<br />

least three crucial gaps in the progress of<br />

evolution — between non-life and first life,<br />

between cell bacteria and organisms containing<br />

the all-important eukaryotic cell, and between<br />

non-conscious life and first consciousness — all<br />

apparently must be bridged by sheer luck!<br />

Dawkins also claims that the designer hypothesis<br />

“raises an even bigger problem than it solves:<br />

who designed the designer”? (page 121; italics<br />

added). If the existence of a universe with the<br />

appearance of design is statistically improbable,<br />

he says, then any Being who could qualify as the<br />

designer must be much more improbable. But<br />

his argument doesn’t even come close to proving<br />

that <strong>God</strong> does not exist. The existence of our<br />

universe, with all of its apparent design, is<br />

“statistically improbable” precisely because it<br />

could have not existed (and, indeed, has not<br />

always existed). But if <strong>God</strong> is the designer who<br />

created the universe, and He has always existed<br />

and could not have not existed, then there’s<br />

nothing statistically improbable about His<br />

existence; the Designer doesn’t need a designer.<br />

What’s the most serious flaw in the book?<br />

Dawkins is a scientist, not a philosopher — and it<br />

shows in his reckless forays into philosophy. He<br />

ridicules one argument for the existence of <strong>God</strong><br />

without naming a single individual who actually<br />

endorses that argument — or even stating the<br />

argument clearly. He simply says it’s a “popular<br />

strand of argument” that links “the existence of<br />

great art to the existence of <strong>God</strong>” (pages 86-87).<br />

Dawkins doesn’t understand Pascal’s wager, which<br />

doesn’t seek to convince people of <strong>God</strong>’s existence,<br />

but simply invites reasonable agnostics to<br />

“bet on <strong>God</strong>” by living their lives as if <strong>God</strong> exists.<br />

And Dawkins miscasts C. S. Lewis’s “Liar, Lord or<br />

Lunatic” trilemma as an argument from Scripture<br />

for <strong>God</strong>’s existence. Lewis’s famous argument<br />

doesn’t come from Scripture, and it doesn’t seek<br />

to prove <strong>God</strong>’s existence. It’s an argument for the<br />

deity of Jesus Christ — an argument that presupposes<br />

reasonable belief in <strong>God</strong>.<br />

R. Douglas Geivett, Ph.D.,<br />

teaches in <strong>Biola</strong>’s seminary, Talbot<br />

School of Theology. He is the author of<br />

Evil and the Evidence for <strong>God</strong> (Temple<br />

<strong>University</strong> Press).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!