Re: [asa] Dawkins and PZ Myers and their 'attitude'

I haven't read a great deal of Dawkins' work but agree that he writes quite well about science. Also -

(a) Christians need not get themselves quite so exercised about the recent spate of atheist books, as if they represented some sort of Armaggedon-like Final Battle.
Intelligent positive presentations of the Christian faith will be much more helpful than frenzied defences.

(b) Wayne is quite right - we should be charitable toward our enemies. I wonder how many ever pray for - not at - Dawkins.

Having said that, there is no reason to pretend that Dawkins (or anyone else) knows what he's talking about in areas in which he doesn't. You may know of the theologian Gordon Kaufman, now an emeritus prof at Harvard. I think he can be fairly characterized as ultra-liberal theologically - as the title of his recent book Jesus and Creativity indicates, he now doesn't want to talk about "God" but about "Creativity." In some pre-conference conversation a few months ago he mentioned a public lecture that Dawkins had given at Harvard which Kaufman described "the dumbest talk about religion that I've ever heard." (I'm quoting from memory but that's pretty close.)

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Iain Strachan
  To: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 4:09 AM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Dawkins and PZ Myers and their 'attitude'

  Wayne,

  I apologise if the use of "strong language" offended you. However, it wasn't my own but a direct quotation from P Z Myers.

  I was merely trying to correct the impression that Dawkins and (by association) Myers are reasonable people who are free of bigotry. As people are aware, I attempt to have reasoned and gentlemanly dialogue with various YEC friends that I have, and I was pointing out the absurdity of using Myers's recommended approach to people in my own housegroup, for example.

  As it happens, an atheist colleague of mine asked me what I thought of Dawkins the other day. I was at a considerable advantage, because he has not read Dawkins and I have (The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker and River out of Eden). What I said to this colleague was that I thought Dawkins was an excellent writer - that I had no problem with the science that he describes, but I did, however think that he allowed himself to get distracted by his long-term crusade against religion. I also pointed out that even some prominent evolutionary biologists had thought he was going too far in the last book - H. Allen Orr's review of The God Delusion in the NY review of books is about as derogatory as you can get.

  Again - apologies for quoting the strong language.
  Iain

  On 4/7/07, Dawsonzhu@aol.com < Dawsonzhu@aol.com> wrote:

    Being a Christian myself, I cannot deny that it is
    difficult to evaluate Dawkins' views objectively. After
    all, I have a vested interest here that I cannot deny.
    I think there is more to life the material,
    and therefore, I think Dawkins is wrong (or at least
    an impoverished view of the fruitfulness of nature),
    but in the end, I cannot prove it, as I can only test things
    that represent material. It is finally a matter between
    Dawkins and God.

    But I think there is a bit more to say here. Have we
    (Christians) contributed our share to making Dawkins
    even more strident and to speaking in such derogatory
    terms of Christians? How many public denouncements
    have been issued at him by powerful Christians? How
    does this affect any person? And, that evolution seems
    to be the best answer to the scientific data, Christians
    attacking Dawkins on that do not speak a good witness
    to the message of scripture about truth. That we do not
    agree with him is clear, but I think we need to spend more
    on understanding why we are Christians, and far less
    on denouncing Dawkins.

    As we come to this time of Easter where Christ
    was crucified for our sins, it seems a good moment
    to reflect on what drove people to say of the son
    of God "crucify him!". What is it in us that makes
    us join a mob to do such kinds of evil? This is
    what we are.

    We are all corrupt and easily corruptible. It is only
    by Grace that we can see that cross and understand
    that salvation lies in following our Lord. When
    we finally understood this, and humbled ourselves
    and began to pour contempt on all our pride, then
    we were made useful for his purpose. From there,
    maybe we could say the word that needs to be said
    in a tough moment. From there, maybe we will do what
    must be done when everyone else has gone astray.
    That is why we want to follow Jesus isn't it?
    To do what is right --- and "right" in that deeply
    Eternal sense of the word.

    Dawkins & co may be lowering the bar more and more.
    I do find that part of concern. But I'm also concerned
    that we are all adding our own contribution to this.
    So, whereas I also share these emotions about this, let's
    all try to tone down the strong language. Dawkins may
    truly despise us, but let's be careful about returning that
    favor.

    by Grace we proceed,
    Wayne

  --
  -----------
  After the game, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.

  - Italian Proverb
  -----------

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Apr 7 08:35:24 2007