The more that I read atheist Richard Dawkins the more convinced I am that he, in many, many places is attempting to inject levity into his bile spewing books. Seriously! I think this guy is trying to rehearse for some future Standup Comedy Routine. I want to touch on just a couple examples.
The first is, Dawkins complains that he finds the Bible to be disjointed.
Ha! Do you get it? “The Bible appears disjointed!” No? Well, he is British after all. Their humour is a bit off for those of us in North America. But it’s still pretty funny if you’ve had enough coffee. I mean, the Bible is a collection of sixty-six (66) documents, written over a period of a thousand years. It was written by people like fishermen, tent-makers, kings, shepherds, doctors and tax collectors and some very strange prophets. They were written when these people were gloriously happy and desperately sad. They were written just after victory and just after defeat. Yes the prophecies are miraculous and the connections to Jesus from Genesis to Revelation are cohesive and awe inspiring, but Dawkins is unable to even know that thread exists.
So here we have Richard Dawkins attempting to shatter Christianity’s foundations by proclaiming, [The Bible is] “a chaotically cobbled-together anthology of disjoined documents” I mean, c’mon, that observation has to be a joke. Ok, so maybe it’s not his best stuff, but still . . . How about this?
In one of his books, Dawkins does this schtick where he pretends to be God. In the “God Delusion,” Dawkins is talking about how Theologians claim the ability to interpret the Bible and he says (I’ll do it in a low, booming God-like voice)
“They cannot get away with it!”
Isn’t that good? Priceless really. Richard Dawkins is talking to those most skilled in their specialty, not his specialty, not someone else’s craft but their specialty and he in effect says,
“I won’t allow it!” I’m putting my foot down on what Theologians can and cannot say about the Bible.”
While grandiosity has always been a charge levelled at atheists, this bit of humour on the part of Dawkins really does take it to a whole new level. A hilarious level if you will. Terry Eagleton, in his review of Dawkins’ The God Delusion, states, “Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology.”
Still not convinced that Richard Dawkins is trying to be a comedian? Check this out.
Atheists have been complaining about the bad press that they’ve been getting over the last - um, forever. For some reason, people tend to see them as arrogant, raging, prideful and aloof. Because of that, atheists have been looking to their fearless leaders for some tips on turning this around. What’s Dawkins’ solution? Get ready now ‘cause this really is funny. Dawkins says,
“Let’s go out into the world and publically identify ourselves Brights!”
C’mon now, even if you’re the most miserable atheist that has ever evolved, you have to admit, That’s Funny! I mean, have you ever wondered what kind of a person needs other people to think of h/himself as a Bright (it means intelligent - specifically, more intelligent that you)? And what kind of a person publicly calls himself that in order to project a more humble, softer, more pleasing and acceptable exterior no less? To send the message that atheists aren’t those who look down their noses on others, Richard Dawkins says to his followers, “Tell them, “I’m a Bright, and you’re not.””
Don’t tell me he didn’t mean that as a joke. Or perhaps he means that the joke is on his atheist followers. After all, once you become as cynical as Richard Dawkins, it becomes almost impossible to differentiate on whom you confer your cynicism. Just ask the three people who’ve been married to him.
. So here we have this man who is either not able to know, or who is pretending to not know that he doesn't have the right to dictate to scholars what they can and cannot say about their own field of study.
. Here we have Richard the Great telling his followers to do the very thing that will make non atheists think even less of sceptics than they already do.
. Here we have someone pretending to be a historical scholar who is either not able to know, or who is pretending to not know the difference between symbolic and literal phrases in the Bible. He even seems to not be able to differentiate between metaphor, irony, or hyperbole. Really, if Richard Dawkins can’t say, this is where a poem ends and a moral directive begins, if he can’t understand that a political diatribe just can’t be mixed with romantic literature, and if finding these variations in genre within the same book comes off as disjointed and difficult to understand for him, then perhaps he should simply stick to biology and leave the Bible completely alone.
Why should he do this? Because the Bible has nothing to say to Richard Dawkins. The Bible is for spiritual seekers. It is not for those who mock and deride those humble enough to admit that they need help