This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Why Richard Dawkins is still an atheist

In October 2008 I attended a lecture by the Christian apologist John Lennox. He could hardly contain his excitement because the previous week he had publicly debated Richard Dawkins, and Dawkins had allegedly made two remarks that had ‘stunned’ him because they seemed, Lennox said, to suggest the world’s ‘atheist-in-chief’ was experiencing a major change of heart.

According to Lennox, Dawkins had conceded a) that he had no difficulty with Einstein’s God, in the sense of God being the laws of physics and b) that “a strong case could be made for a deistic God.” And what this meant, declared Lennox, almost bursting a blood vessel in his missionary zeal, was that Dawkins had a sense that there must have been an intelligence to account for the beginning of things; and Lennox went on to insinuate that Dawkins was in the process of abandoning atheism and was well on his way to becoming a deist - at least: “There’s a lot going on with Richard Dawkins at the moment!”, he announced ecstatically, leaving his overwhelmingly Christian audience with high hopes of a full conversion to Jesus at any moment.

To anyone who had actually read The God Delusion, this was rather amusing, since there was nothing here that wasn’t in the book, so talk of changes of heart was wishful thinking at best; but to anyone who, like me, had heard the earlier debate, it was also an example of egregious quote-mining. What Richard had actually said was:

“The deist God would be one that I think it would be - one could make a reasonably respectable case for that, not a case that I would accept, but I think it is a serious discussion that we could have.” (Emphasis mine.)

He went on to contrast this idea with Christianity, for which, by implication, not even a “reasonably respectable case” could be made. (At the time of writing you can hear the full debate for yourself by clicking here.)

There is absolutely nothing in this or elsewhere in Richard’s debate comments that suggests a conversion to deism - much less Christianity. Indeed, describing arguments for deism as ‘not a case that I would accept’ is pretty categorical. Yet there was John Lennox, practically killing the fatted calf.

alt text
The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams (R) and atheist scholar Richard Dawkins pose for a photograph outside Clarendon House at Oxford University, before their debate in the Sheldonian theatre in Oxford, central England, February 23, 2012. (ANDREW WINNING - REUTERS)

The parallels with this week’s press hysteria over Richard’s description of himself as agnostic in his discussion with the Archbishop of Canterbury are, I hope, obvious. Religious commentators have become so excited at the thought of his conversion that I almost don’t have the heart to break it to them that he said nothing in Thursday’s discussion that he hadn’t already said six years ago in The God Delusion. You’ll find the relevant section in Chapter 2, including the seven-point scale where one represents total certainty that there is a God and seven represents total certainty that there is not. Right there Richard writes,

“I count myself in category 6, but leaning towards 7 - I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden.”

And how did he describe himself to the archbishop on Thursday, in his supposedly stunning retreat from atheism? “I’d put myself at 6.9.”

Concession? Conversion? The answer to Christian prayers? Hardly! It was as clear a restatement of the position he took in The God Delusion as you could wish for.

So how can this be? How can an atheist also be an agnostic? The answer is simple.

Read on

TAGGED: ATHEISM, MEDIA, RICHARD DAWKINS


RELATED CONTENT

Spanish artist faces prison over 'how...

Ben Child - Guardian 37 Comments

Javier Krahe prosecuted for 'offending religious feelings' after 1978 short film was broadcast on Spanish TV

No blood on the carpet. How...

Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net 174 Comments

[Journalists] seem to feel let down when they discover that the real people aren't anything like the way they so relentlessly portray us; as if, since they've gone to the trouble of inventing extravagant caricatures of us, we should at least have the decency to live up to them in real life.
Also in Polish

Q&A: Pell vs Dawkins - April 9, Easter...

David Knox - TV tonight - Australia 141 Comments

On Easter Monday night Q & A will host a two-man debate between Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell and outspoken, British atheist Richard Dawkins.

'Gay cure' group's London bus adverts...

- - BBC Comments

An advertising campaign backed by a Christian group which has been described as anti-gay has been pulled from London buses.

A brutal price still paid for daring to...

Amol Rajan - The Independent 39 Comments

Their assault illustrates the extent to which defenders of religion still dominate our press, the brutal retaliation exacted on clever opponents of faith and the incorrigible stupidity of Sayeeda Warsi's claim about "militant secularism" last week.

The world has forgotten the real...

Michael Hanlon - The Telegraph 33 Comments

At one point, governments in Europe, including ours, were offering to fly expats home from places where the radiation levels were lower than the natural background count in Aberdeen or Cornwall.

MORE

MORE BY PAULA KIRBY

How would Jesus vote?

Paula Kirby - The Washington Post Comments

How would Jesus vote?

Blessed are those with a persecution...

Paula Kirby - Washington Post - On... 39 Comments

Your right to practice your religion no more entitles you to try to save souls in your employer’s time than your right to a family life (equally guaranteed by Human Rights legislation) entitles you to take long phone calls from your spouse during working hours.

Explaining the RDFRS UK/Ipsos MORI poll

Paula Kirby - BBC Local Radio 35 Comments

4 BBC local radio interviews with Paula Kirby of RDFRS UK, discussing the Ipsos MORI poll.

‘How do atheists find meaning in life?’

Paula Kirby - Washington Post On Faith 200 Comments

Life cannot be meaningless so long as we have the capacity to affect the well-being of ourselves and others. For true meaninglessness, we would need heaven.

Evolution threatens Christianity

Paula Kirby - Washington Post On Faith 296 Comments

Christianity is like a big, chunky sweater. It may feel cozy, it may keep you warm, but just let one stitch be dropped and the whole thing unravels before your very eyes. Evolution is that stitch.

Spirituality: It’s only human

Paula Kirby - Washington Post - On... 50 Comments

Religion is a parasite that feeds on all that is good in humanity as a whole and then proclaims it as its own gift to the world.

MORE

Comments

Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment