LIFESTYLE

REACTION TO THE GOD DELUSIONS BY RICHARD DAWKINS

As a Christian, reading books by unbelievers especially by self confessed Atheist Richard Dawkins is like walking on fire to see what happens. It always makes one question everything they believe in while wondering if they should join the other side of the divide.

For me, my curiousity of what’s out there (especially when it has to do with opposing view points) is hard to be tethered because I belived in the old saying “knowledge is power”.

Now lets get back to The God Delusion. Dawkins categorically stated that believing in a personal God is tantamout to delusion because to him, a supernatural creator doesn’t exist.

images-150.jpg

Dawkins has this to say about the Christian God :

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction. Jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic-cleanser; a misogynistic homophobic racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal….P31

He went ahead to portray God as a sadomasochistic and malevolent bully, one who shouldn’t be taken seriously.

This book also talked about polytheism and monotheism and also tried to encourage people who feel vague yearning to leave their religion that they have the power to do so.

Dawkins also tried to use his book to “raise consciousness to the fact that to be an atheist is a realistic aspiration and a brave and splendid one”.

Also, he said that the God hypothesis should be analysed sceptically like any other science invention.

The author also made mention of childhood indoctrination and the air of superiority it creates in people – tricking them into believing their religion is true and the others are false. He gave an analogy using people born in Arkansas (Christians) and people born in Afghanistan (Muslims) who think of each other’s religion as false.

The book also tried to portray atheists like himself as people “who stands tall to face the far horizon”, people who have healthy independence of mind and of course people who should exude pride in what they believe in.

Dawkins stated that he intends to use this book to encourage more atheists to “come out” and also, he hope that The God Delusion will make religious leaders become atheist after reading this book.

Undoubtedly, Dawkins is an excellent scientist and even world’s most popular science writer but his attempt at philosophy and atheology left many gaping holes and some of his arguments flawed. His attempt at philosophy is somewhat sophomoric with a smug attitude. Therefore, sticking to evolotionary biology will be more appropriate because that’s up his alley.

In my opinion, this book would have achieved ‘his goal’ more if he didn’t descend to ridicule, mockery and vitriolic attacks on God thereby making the readers irritated with the ‘messenger’ and ‘the message’. Dawkins made people think God who is a spirit is his enemy. I fail to see the correlation.

Have you read Dawkins’ book? What’s your opinion?

Photo credits: Google images

 <a href="http://“>Here is your source to obtain the book

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “REACTION TO THE GOD DELUSIONS BY RICHARD DAWKINS

  1. The book has been incredibly successful online too. The God Delusion was unofficially translated by an ex-Muslim into Arabic and the online translation has been downloaded over 10 million times, 30% of those downloads in Saudi Arabia alone. You could argue that the West were offended by the book but for some people elsewhere, it gives them a lifeline.

    1. Sam, I’m aware that The God Delusion is a best-selling book. I personally consider Dawkins as one of the intellectuals who cannot be cowed into silence.
      Reading this book many times and many of his other books like The Magic of Reality etc , have made me come to the conclusion that Richard has a point, A Valid point but the narrative is always a hard pill to swallow.
      I really understand that having the same perspective is a recipe for disaster but vitriolic comments doesn’t go down well with me either.
      Thanks for commenting and I will check out your blog also.

      1. Thank you, not that I was trying to play devils advocate, I just know the perception of his book will change depending on the reader and how religion plays a part in their culture. Pretty fascinating!

  2. For those that feel or see the presence of God, Richard Dawkins , ” Delusion of God “presents atheism as religion, as it sounds confrontational to people’s belief , and is trying to gain followership. Though I’ve not read it, your review has already given me an insight on what to expect. I’m intrigued at your analysis, and would be tempted to take a closer look at it. Nice job there. I love your blog.

  3. I agree. I’m almost done with this book, so I’ll be writing about it soon, too. He really is a great scientist, but when he starts getting technical, I get kind of lost. When he talks about theology and examples of the evils of religion, I can often see how he wouldn’t convince any believers, but instead he would anger them as he ridicules them and their beliefs. I suppose someone had to be harsh though, so that’s what he’s doing. I have a lot of thoughts on the book that I have yet to sort out though.

  4. I’m deeply impressed and glad to here that a person of faith gave this book a chance. I’ve read Dawkins’ Selfish Gene and some shorter writings of his before–he’s a brilliant scientist and an excellent writer. He, like Edward O. Wilson, are veering more towards philosophy and theology as they are getting older. Of course, they are not accredited for these fields, but sometimes they can have excellent points. I’m unable to comment on Dawkins’ God Delusion–quite frankly it’s been collecting dust on my bookshelf as I busy myself with other authors.

    Perhaps look into Edward O. Wilson’s “The Meaning of Human Existence,” his call-to-arms for secularism is a less bitter pill, much more sympathetic and representative, I believe, of secular-intellectual thought.

    Again, kudos for given Dawkins a critical read. That’s more than admirable. Perhaps I should dive into some Aquinas or Barth to better understand the other side as well!

    Best Regards,

    Brian Geiger

Let's hear from you