Atheist Richard Dawkins: A Cultural Christian?
He told the BBC's Have Your Say that he did not want to "purge" the UK of its Christian heritage.
I must admit that I was completely surprised by this admission that Dawkins considers himself a "cultural Christian," not because it makes him a Christian, but because he gives credence to the fact that Christian societies are most certainly better ones. We need to be clear on the former point, though: Do not read into this that Dawkins is really, in any way, calling himself a Christian. He simply supports the influence and expressions of it. In other words, he likes the results of Christianity, but thinks it's all still a figment of someone's imagination. So, if it works, great, but don't expect much more from it than that.
In the article, Dawkins explains that he does not want to put an end to Christian tradition. In fact, he states, "[Britain] is historically a Christian country. I'm a cultural Christian in the same way many of my friends call themselves cultural Jews or cultural Muslims. So, yes, I like singing carols along with everybody else. I'm not one of those who wants to purge our society of our Christian history. If there's any threat these sorts of things, I think you will find it comes from rival religions and not from atheists."
The last point he makes is arguable to say the least, but is this a case of wanting to have it both ways? Perhaps. I simply think Professor Dawkins is...how should I say...delusional. He claims to "fully recognise the full historical and cultural significance [of Christianity] in our country." He even goes so far as to say, "We should all be aware of that and celebrate that." The question I have is "why?"
If Christians are suffering from some sort of "God delusion," why would we want to celebrate delusional behavior in any form? How delusional must it be to encourage people to live in a fantasy world? The reality is, even Dawkins understands that true Christianity leads to the kind of society that everyone wants to live in. However, if there is nothing of substance behind it, it cannot last. As a matter of fact, the further we get away from Judeo-Christian influence, the more dangerous and out of control culture becomes. The reason is that simply embracing common morality doesn't work. Without a transcendant law-giver; a universal morality, there is no "common morality," but instead, man can determine whatever "rules" he chooses. In other words, one society could say that citizens killing one another on a whim is wrong while another deems it perfectly acceptable. Who is "right"? Simple...both. There is no "right."
The argument often comes back that no society would choose such rules since we naturally do that which promotes the common good of man; sort of the old survival of the species theory. However, that assumes that the survival of the species is desirable by all. Mass murderers and terrorists might have a different idea of "good." Again, what is the common "good" of man? It all depends on who is defining it. We certainly cannot limit it to just mass murderers and psycho-terrorists. Many governments, even today, have pretty broad ideas of what is good, killing people for what most in the West consider insane. Just look at what one culture wanted to do to a woman who mis-named a teddy bear! Hmm, common good, huh? She was actually lucky. She only got off because of the governmental pressure placed on their leaders to release her. Don't forget, we're talking about the Western government shaped by Judeo-Christians values are the ones who pushed for the release.
I want to go on record as saying I am absolutely against social Christianity which emphasizes mere actions as opposed to a heart transformation brought on because of a personal relationship with Christ (unfortunately, our churches today are full of social Christians!), but when society loses its Christian influence, it eventually dissolves into Relativism. This is the philosophy in which morality is based on the individual's own ideas of what is good and right, thereby leaving no basis for that which is actually and objectively good for that society. (For more of my comments on the subject of Relativism, use it as a keyword in the search Espresso Roast feature on this blog). Mr. Dawkins seems to realize this, to at least some degree, making even is own "godless delusion" hard to actually live with.
Read the complete BBC article here.
Labels: atheism, Christianity, culture, Darwin, David C. Price, Evolution, God, religion
posted by DAVID C. PRICE at 12/13/2007 11:10:00 PM
0 comments
links to this post
|
