My hometown of Charleston was treated recently to a public conversation between Dr. Richard Dawkins, arguably the world’s most famous atheist, and Dr. Herb Silverman, inarguably South Carolina’s most famous atheist.
Dr. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist who has authored 11 best-selling books on atheism, and Dr. Silverman is a retired mathematics professor who founded the Secular Coalition for America.
I could not attend the interview with Dawkins because I was with my grandsons that night, but from what I read in the newspaper account -- and it mirrored what I have read in his books -- the man does not know what he’s talking about.
I feel qualified to say that because I spent 20 years researching Jesus of Nazareth up close up and personal before I wrote The Gospel of Yeshua, and the Jesus I found was nothing like the Jesus Dawkins ridiculed.
For example, Dawkins found it “an astonishing idea that the only reason you are good is because you’re frightened of the great camera in the sky.” That would astonish most Christians, too (fundamentalists excepted). Jesus spent his entire career teaching people to love, never to fear, and I defy Dawkins to show otherwise.
Dawkins also wondered how anybody could believe Jesus actually turned water into wine. Well, Dick, most Christians would agree with you. They don’t believe that either. That story only occurs in the Book of John, which was never intended to be taken as fact. Matthew, Mark and Luke tell the facts of Jesus’ life; John focuses on truth, and as a result most scholars agree it is a classic of spiritual writing. The fact that Dawkins apparently doesn’t know that displays his ignorance.
I promised to keep this blog under 300 words, so I’ll continue this tomorrow.
-Skip
Go get 'em Skip!
ReplyDeleteNorrrm2417@gmail.com
Could you please cite a reference that details which stories from the Bible are fact and which are abject fiction? If the story about Jesus turning water into wine isn't "fact" then what about all the others? Raising the dead, casting out demons, walking on water, the great flood, Adam and Eve, being swallowed by a giant fish, burning bushes, the resurection, Soddom and Gamorah et. al. Which are fact and which are fiction?
ReplyDeleteObviously there is no such reference. But, for starters, if you compare the Gospel of John with the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke), you will discover that both cannot possibly be literally true. John shows Jesus as constantly claiming to be the Messiah; the synoptics show him going to great lengths to avoid being identified that way. John says Jesus' ministry lasted three years and he cleansed the temple at the beginning of it; the synoptics say it lasted one year and he cleansed the temple at the end of it. John (in which almost all the miracles occur) says Jesus brought a dead man back to life; the synoptics never mention that (or the great majority of the other miracles), although it seems they would have mentioned them if they had actually happened. They even contradict each other in matters of style and emphasis. Finally, when Jesus was in the wilderness he rejected the temptation to become a miracle-maker because people would focus on his miracles and not on his teaching, so how could he turn around and make miracle-making his life? As for the Old Testament, it is packed with so many contradictions that it cannot possibly be literally true. In general, the Bible is about truth, not merely about facts.
ReplyDelete"In general, the Bible is about truth, not merely about facts."
ReplyDeleteSounds like a pedantic rationalization to me. "Truth" and "fact" are synonyms. Regardless, the overwhelming body of Christians believe the Bible (in it's entirety) is the resolute word of God himself, and by definition can contain no such contradictions. It is, in their minds, all resoundingly the truth. It's a tough sell that one of the four Gospels ought to be discounted in part or whole based on a few perceived discontinuities. And if the validity of one book of the New Testament can be doubted or discounted, why not the entirety of the whole thing?