RECOMMENDED READINGS

"We Believe in God" -- The Greatest Minds Believed

 Is God Cruel?

RICHARD DAWKINS: A CLOSER LOOK

One simple paragraph on the first page of Dawkins' preface to his work, The God Delusion, reveals glaringly that Richard Dawkins is neither an objective scientist, nor a brilliant intellect and that he is a cunning and deceitful recruitment agent for the militant atheist army.

Dawkins starts his preface with a family anecdote. From there he takes us to the first true "substantial" paragraph of his book. It is in this most revealing paragraph that one can "immediately" see Dawkins’ glaring deficiencies and the true aims of his book. Let’s analyze the paragraph together in detail and let’s get a glimpse into how intellectually deficient and cunning this man truly is.

He begins the paragraph with, “I suspect” (Good, cautious scientific language, Richard.)

"—well, I am sure—" (Oh well... No more cautious language, but "absolute certainty." Dawkins real nature now comes out.)

“…that there are lots of people out there who have been brought up in some religion or other, are unhappy in it, don’t believe it, or are worried about the evils that are done in its name; people who feel vague yearnings to leave their parents’ religion and wish they could, but just don’t realize that leaving is an option.”

The people Dawkins refers to are obviously people who have a level of intelligence. They are "aware" that their religion is false; they don’t believe it; they are concerned about “the evils that are done in its name.” Clearly they are quite advanced intellectually. After all, they have bought Richard's very thick and challenging book, therefore they must be intelligent people. Yet, Dawkins tells us that they “don’t realize that leaving is an option.”  Is Richard thinking straight? Are they intelligent people or are they stupid?  Can such people not know that leaving their parents’ religion is an option? Here is a man who is supposed to be a “superior” scientist, logician, and writer who shows absurd pseudo-logic from the start of his preface to his book.

He continues,

“If you are one of them, this book is for you. It is intended to raise your consciousness to the fact that to be an atheist is a realistic aspiration, and a brave and splendid one.”

Now, let's be honest. Is the language used by Richard not reminiscent of that of an army recruiter? It is obvious that what he is seeking is "recruits" for his atheist army. Being an atheist “soldier” he tells these ambivalent people is a “realistic aspiration.” Fighting with Richard against the theistic hordes  is also a “brave” aspiration and, “to be humble about it,” a “splendid one.”  Masterful recruitment ad, Richard -- totally masterful…

He then goes on.

“You can be an atheist who is happy, balanced, moral, and intellectually fulfilled. This is my first of my consciousness raising messages.”

Yes, you heard right! Reject God and religion and you can be HAPPY. Perhaps, Richard... until your health fails you. Until you start losing your loved ones. Until you see the day of your departure get closer and closer. Until you lie in bed with cancer and see no meaning for your suffering. Then, Richard, will they still be happy?

You can also be a “BALANCED” human being. Yes, a lack of divine direction, according to Richard, will make you a balanced human being, because you have within you the “capacity” to live a mentally and physically balanced lifestyle. Religion may have kept you from this amazing life-enhancing gift. Reject religion and you will have greater mental and physical health -- which are the well-known results of a “balanced” lifestyle.

AND…you  can also be a “MORAL” human being. You see, what you have been told about needing God to guide you, so as to be a moral being is false. You can conceive “your own” ethical principles and you “can” and “will” faithfully abide by those principles, no matter what temptations come your way, because YOU ARE STRONG and you CAN be moral without any irrational set of commandments hanging over you -- from a "mythical" being.

Lastly, if you reject God you can be, “INTELLECTUALLY FULFILLED.” Now, this one is more difficult to figure out. What does he mean by this? My hunch is that what he is really saying is that by being an atheist one becomes intellectually “superior” to other intellectual "Lilliputians" who walk the earth. The reason I am swaying in this direction is because later on in the book Dawkins offers a new "humble" term to describe atheists: “BRIGHTS.”

Can any package be more complete, therefore? Happiness; greater mental and physical health; sainthood and intellectual superiority.  Any takers?

There is Richard's "superior intellect," captured by a few simple sentences. No doubt Richard can be a fine scientist and an intelligent being, if he were simply to stay within the realm of strict Science. Unfortunately, in departing from that realm and in becoming committed to a failed philosophy Richard has rejected rationality and is blindly propagating foolishness, just as the Scriptures warn.

M. Caputo

   HOME