Comments on The God Delusion by Dr. Richard Dawkins
(Chapters four to seven)
Scripture quotations are from the J.N.D. translation.
Page references are normally to Dr. Dawkins book.
Page
116
The most frustrating thing about Dr. Dawkins writing is that he makes assertions
without attempting to prove what he says on vital points. Certainly things don’t come into
existence just by chance, but neither can they come into existence by natural selection.
Things can’t be selected until they exist and one looks in vain in Dr. Dawkins writings for
information as to how living things originated or changed into what they are today. Certainly
creatures have in varying degrees a built in ability to adapt, but that is not evolution. One
might observe that creatures of the same species do not always fight one another for space
and predators normally only seek out prey species to eat when they are hungry. Creatures are
not always competing with each other.
127
Certainly gaps in our knowledge can be eliminated when our knowledge of how
things work increases. However, what about increases in our knowledge that undermine the
theory of evolution. Does Dr. Dawkins think there are none ? What about Michael Denton’s
work ? Has that been rebutted ?
The existence of intermediate species (and there are intermediate forms existing
today, such as, between sheep and goats) is still a problem. How did they become
intermediates ? This is the million dollar question ! One could ask regarding any computer
program: “Who wrote it?” Similarly one could ask regarding any genetic program: “Who
wrote it?” The use of letters implies that there is a writer. It also implies that there is an
alphabet raising the question: “Who invented it?” These sort of questions are neither raised,
nor answered by Dr. Dawkins.
131
Regarding the mousetrap to my knowledge the point is not made that for it to function
there must be bait and also a mouse or equivalent creature to be caught. Something might
possibly be caught without bait, but it is not likely.
134/135
Explaining how something works is quite different from explaining how something
originated. It is within the scope of scientific work to find out the former, but trying to find
out who wrote a genetic program millions of years ago is quite a different matter. If not
written, how did it come to exist ?
Those that believe in the God of the Bible do not believe that he was created or came
into existence by a process of evolution or by any other means. In any case He could not have
come into existence by a process of selection (natural or otherwise) because there is none
besides Him (Isaiah 44:6). He always existed. He is from eternity to eternity (Psalm 41:13).
Eternity, incidentally is an ever existing NOW, not interminable time; hence the beginning
and eternity are interchangeable terms (Proverbs 8:22/23).
God is stated by Paul to be over all and also to permeate everything (Ephesians 4:6).
That at any rate is the teaching of Scripture (Acts 17:28) (page 134).
136
Strange is it not that our own planet has just the right conditions for life as we know
it, yet no intelligence was involved in arranging for these needed conditions to exist ? Many
people do not buy into this idea even if they are not religious. One cannot believe that the
large number of people who do not believe in evolution, say, in the USA, are all
fundamentalist Christians.
Jupiter is well placed to intercept asteroids and we have a relatively large moon to
stabilize our axis of rotation. May I suggest that these things do not encourage evolution, but
are simply there to make life as we know it possible. I suspect that the other planets have
their uses, though we have not found what they are yet ! A good subject for study I would
suggest.
Even if life could be created in a laboratory, it would still be a creation - something
produced by an intelligent being and not just chance.
137
What Dr. Dawkins appears to think is that Christians believe that God creates things
by a sort of magic. Rather, it is the operation of God’s Spirit that brought the cosmos and all
that is in it into being (Isaiah 40, particularly verse 13). Note that work was involved
(Genesis 2:1-3).
138
Why should not a different form of life exist that is, say, capable of living in fire ?
Think of what we read in Daniel 3:24-30. One must be careful. There are very long odds that
life could arise spontaneously according to Dr. Dawkins. What then are the odds that the
story in Daniel is true ? Would Dr. Dawkins hold that the odds are longer ? What about all
the other miraculous happenings in the Bible ?
141
Luck: there is no such thing really. We say it is luck when we are ignorant of a cause.
When Dr. Dawkins speaks of facts (the constants, for example) he is interesting.
However, when he makes positive dogmatic statements without supporting evidence he shows
the weakness of his thinking. When all is said and done we are here. There is life. Life exists
in creatures made of material, but requires intelligent work to be done before it can exist.
Natural selection is largely population pressure and there is no actual power in it.
145
Creation is economical (for example, the four letter alphabet used in the genome).
Wisdom is involved (Proverbs 3:19/20). A lot of universes would be uneconomical, just as
evolution by natural selection would be uneconomical. There would be a lot of wastage.
148
The Bible does teach that God is spirit, but that does not mean that He has no parts.
See the piece on my web site “Simplicity as to the Christ - Appendix 12, God and Man”. Man
is made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27).
155
God knows good and evil (Genesis 3:22). It is not just that He created physical things
but that He set up laws by which the cosmos can function (Job 38:33; Psalm 119:90/91). He
also set out laws by which man could live by down here (Leviticus 18:5).
157
A person who denies the resurrection of Christ is not a real Christian (Romans 10:9).
Dr. Dawkins speaks of a crane by which living creatures came to exist, but who made
the crane ?
158
John Bunyan toyed with atheism long before Darwin was born. See his autobiography
“Grace Abounding” numbered paragraphs 244 and 262. He also mentions atheism in both the
Pilgrims Progress and the Holy War.
163
In chapter five Dr. Dawkins keeps harping on about Natural Selection. It reminds me
of the way that the Exclusive Brethren keep harping on about Separation. Getting obsessed
with anything tends to get it out of proportion in our minds and leads to biassed and erroneous
thinking. After all, what is natural selection ? Some would say: “The survival of the fittest”.
There are apparently five different meanings of this according to Dr. Dawkins (The Extended
Phenotype chapter 10). Do we know really what we are talking about ?
164
Is religion extravagant, as Dr. Dawkins suggests ? Apparently he is not referring here
to moral teaching, but to rituals and things like that. The answer really depends on whether
what we are doing is worship acceptable to God. That much in the way of religious
observances have no real use is no doubt true (Isaiah 1:10-17). However, much also depends
on whether God actually exists and whether what we do is pleasing to Him and is not
something that just pleases the worshippers. The danger is simply thinking of ourselves and
what pleases us. Self becomes the object as in Ecclesiastes 2. Selfishness underlies sin
(Genesis 2). Christ died in order that He “might set free all those who through fear of death
through the whole of their life were subject to bondage” (Hebrews 2:14/15). The bondage may
take the form of rituals, penances, indulgences, etc. or their Old Testament equivalent. Dr.
Dawkins goes on to compare religious wastefulness with the economy of evolution. However,
one cannot see that the evolution trial and error scheme is economical; creation is much less
wasteful !
166
Though Darwin was not a religious person, he nevertheless appreciated the civilising
benefits of the Christian version of it, else why did he allow Fegan to use his schoolroom to
hold Gospel Missions in. It is beyond reasonable doubt that savage tribes in countries like
Papua New Guinea have become civilised as a result of the preaching of the Christian Gospel
to them.
167
Dr. Dawkins is sceptical about homoeopathic remedies. (It is difficult to know what he
is not sceptical about save Darwinian evolution by natural selection.) My parents when I was a
child of about four had homoeopathic doctors. I was given that sort of medication. I recollect
looking at the glass in which the medication was thinking it looks like water and tastes like
water. I was also given powders which tasted like glucose. I got better anyway else I wouldn’t
be alive to tell the tale. Since then I have read a book by an Iranian doctor about our bodies
many cries for water and have wondered whether it was the water that cured me ! Incidentally,
I have wondered if the doctor got his ideas from Daniel (either directly or indirectly) as he
also advocates pulses to eat (see Daniel 1:12).
169
Man has a built in need of God. Man may attempt to satisfy that need by religious
activity, but it can only be really satisfied by the teaching of Scripture as many have found
out. Self flagellation, beds of nails, penances and the like are unsatisfactory, that is why the
Bible speaks of ‘Justification by Faith’ (Romans 3:28; 5:1.
176/177
Scripture says: “Children, obey your parents in [the] Lord” (Ephesians 6:1), not willy-
nilly. There is a limitation. If a parent tells me to do evil I should not do it. Dr. Dawkins does
not mention this.
178/179
Dr. Dawkins denies all the fundamental historical facts of Christianity as well as the
bits that the Roman Catholic Church has added on, such as the bodily ascension of Mary the
Mother of Jesus and transubstantiation. Mary was not always a virgin. See my website article:
“Mary the Mother of Jesus”. Dr. Dawkins speaks of a fatherless man. Scripture does not. God
was Christ’s Father (John 3:18).
180
Dr. Dawkins is a dyed-in-the-wool monist, not a dualist. He does not believe in body
and soul. Nothing in his view survives death. What he makes of reincarnation I do not know.
How some children can have in their minds things that happened to others who they never
knew is often explained by reincarnation, though there may be another explanation. We can’t
all be reincarnations of Adam personally ! Some have investigated this phenomenon, but some
are just sceptical and deny the results of the researches which show that there is reasonable
ground for the existence of the phenomenon. See also my article “After Death”.
181
Talking of purpose: mankind usually does things with a purpose. When people do
things without a purpose they are usually mad. Though mankind has purposes Dr. Dawkins
would have us believe that there is no purpose in the existence of the cosmos. The whole thing
must be just madness. Man himself did not decide that it would be a good idea if he existed,
something/someone other than himself must have decided that !
182
Dr. Dawkins specifically states that living things are not designed. However we know
that mankind designs things and for that matter so do many creatures, so that we get birds
nests, beavers dams and termites nests for example. They are all made to serve a purpose,
though we may say that it is only instinct that causes the creatures to make what they do.
183
“Natural selection shaped them”. How can natural selection shape anything ? Selection
of any sort can only make choices, it cannot make anything ! We are biologically programmed
says Dr. Dawkins, but who did the programming ? Natural selection is not a programmer.
184
As to blaming inanimate things: my wife often chides me for doing that ! As to broken
vases, my Mother had a Brother who when the family were moving house told no one to move
the valuable vase that was upstairs; he would move it himself. However he unfortunately
dropped it at the top of the stairs so that it fell down the stairs and was smashed to pieces. All
he could say was: “Oh !”. His Mother was not angry about it as she was not particularly
interested in antiques.
190
The ability to reason is an important faculty, as are our other faculties, such as
imagination. They all have their uses, though they may be used for good or evil. A
concordance shows many references to reason in the Bible such as Isaiah 1:18; Acts 17:2,17
and so on.
194
That messages passed down a line can become garbled is true. The story is told
(apocryphal maybe) of a message sent back from the front to HQ. This was: “Send
reinforcements, I’m going to advance”. The message that reached HQ was: “Send three and
four pence, I’m going to a dance.!” Dr. Dawkins writes of “systematic deterioration”. He is no
doubt right. But is not nature deteriorating ? Are not species dying out and minerals getting
used up. Where will all this end ? If there is no renewal the cosmos would disintegrate, would
it not? The Bible speaks of renewal (Psalm 104:30; Isaiah 66:22).
199/200
Dr. Dawkins goes on to speak of “religious memes”. However he lumps Islamic ideas,
Roman Catholic errors and Biblical teaching all together. He gives eight examples. If we
leave out Islamic ideas and Roman Catholic ideas we are not left with much. Saying we will
survive our own death is not accurate language. What the Bible teaches is that our souls will
not die with our bodies (Matthew 10:28; Revelation 6:9). He says: “Belief in God is supreme
virtue”. Believing God is the virtue according to the Bible (Romans 4:3); not simply believing
in God’s existence. Then he says: “Faith (belief without evidence) is a virtue”. In Genesis 2
Eve believed the serpent rather than God which led to her disobeying God and eating the
forbidden fruit. What we have in Romans 1:5 is “obedience of faith” which is the opposite of
what we have in Genesis. Believing “old wives’ fables” is not believing according to Scripture
(1 Timothy 4:7). Dr. Dawkins in his book “Climbing mount Improbable page 74” says: “It is
true that a small minority of mutations may make things better.” (Note the words small
minority and may ). One would suggest that he is holding on to evolution with almost blind
faith himself.
What Dr. Dawkins does not take into account is the existence of spiritual forces - both
good and evil. Neither the activities of God’s Spirit nor of evil spirits are even considered by
Dr. Dawkins. Everything is reduced to what can be ascertained by philosophical thinking and
scientific experiment.
201
As to Mormonism, it is clearly false. However, we must not assume that it was just
something spun out of the head of Joseph Smith. There may well have been the activity of
fallen angels. Paul considers such a possibility (Galatians 1:8). Anyway, why should we deny
that angels exist, when we consider that alien civilisations may do ?
202
Christianity does not promise earthly blessings, but spiritual ones (Ephesians 1:3). Not
something most people want. What is promised is not what man’s mind could conceive (1
Corinthians 2:9).
211
We now come to chapter six. As Dr. Dawkins will have gathered by now I do not
advocate the acceptance of any religion. What is needed is what is acceptable “before God
and the Father” (James 1:27). Some religions are very evil. Think of that practised by the
Aztecs. Thankfully that religion was put an end to. The people who wrote the sort of letters
from which Dr. Dawkins quotes do not help. They are not likely to convince anyone that they
are in error.
I have just been reading my Accountancy magazine. A regular contributor to the
magazine writes: “When debating theism/atheism with my daughter... , a fanatical Richard
Dawkins disciple, I can at least interject the odd question on the origin of life, love, music,
consciousness or natural law before being subjected to another numbing harangue on how
molecular DNA, driven by genetic mutation, accounts for the miracle of Lacrimosa in
Mozarts Requiem. That debate usually founders on the issue of evidence...” I wonder if it
pleases Dr. Dawkins to know that he has at least one fanatical disciple.
215
Many years ago a writer to the Daily Telegraph pointed out that no atheist had ever
done anything noble. A correspondent replied that Florence Nightingale was one that had.
However, the writer of a third letter said that she was not an atheist, but a freethinking deist.
(This is what I remember of the correspondence).
221
Did we ever live in “small and stable bands like baboons” ? Why not like chimps if we
are more closely related to them ?
223
“The underlying deep structure of grammar is universal.” This would explain how the
whole earth at one time had one language, and the same words (Genesis 11:1).
224
Christ died to save others. Would we lay down our lives for others (see Romans 5:7/8).
That there are sometimes difficult moral decisions to make is true (consider John 11:50) ?
226
Punishment can act as a restraint on evil. Since corporal punishment was stopped in
schools, behaviour has not improved to say the least. Why do we impose fines and have
prisons ?
One recollects, reading the story of a man who took his Son to a farmer’s field to dig
up some of the farmers carrots (I think that was the vegetable) to which he had no right.
Before he set about to dig up the carrots he looked this way and that to make sure no one was
watching. However his Son said: “You haven’t looked up”. He left the field without taking the
carrots. I think the moral is obvious. See Exodus 2:12 for a similar though more serious
incident.
228
Dr. Dawkins appears to advocate every man doing what is right in his own eyes
(Judges 21:25). However, the Christian’s standard is Christ. “Grace and truth subsists through
Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). He is the God-given standard (1 Peter 2:21 and 1 John 2:6) This
would help us to get out of the moral maze.
237
In chapter seven Dr. Dawkins says the Bible is cobbled together. If he looks at the Old
Testament in the Hebrew, to which the Lord Himself refers (Luke 24:44) he will see that there
are three sections: The Law, The Prophets and the Psalms. As Mr Taylor Snr once said: “The
Law refers to the rights of God over man, the Prophets to the patience of God waiting on man,
and the Psalms refer to the result of the testimony in man” (New Series Vol.18 page 101).
How Bishop Spong can be a bishop at all baffles me. I give credit to Dr. Dawkins for
nailing his colours to the mast so to speak. He appears to me to be frank. It is not unknown for
a clergyman to be an atheist. If nothing else, such a person is in a false position.
Dr. Dawkins says the story of Noah is derived from the Babylonian myth of Uta-
Napisthim. How does he know this ? I am well aware that this idea has been trotted out for
many years. However the flood story is known all over the world. There are various versions,
but the Bible story is likely to be the right one if only because the ark was said to rest on the
mountains of Ararat - far from Palestine and a place only mentioned in three other places in
Scripture (2 Kings 19:37; Isaiah 37:38 and Jeremiah 51:27). What should God have done ?
The world had reached a state where every imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart was
only evil and that continually (Genesis 6:5) . It wasn’t a case of drowning a lot of innocent
people. Relatively speaking drowning is not an unpleasant way to die. After all, if Christ does
not come, “we must needs die” (2 Samuel 14:14). This is not something that is arguable. Noah
had apparently been preaching for many years (2 Peter 2:5), but the inhabitants of the earth
had apparently not taken warning. No doubt they were sceptical and did not believe in the
coming deluge.
God knows what He is doing. He is the judge of all (Hebrews 12:23). I could not take
it upon myself to judge the world.
238
Why should God concern Himself with us ? This is what the Psalmist said as well as
Dr. Dawkins: “What is man, that thou are mindful of him ?” (Psalm 8:4). Job said something
similar (Job 7:17-21). However it is man that God is interested in as can be seen from Genesis
1 onwards. Further wisdom said: “My delights [were] with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:31).
Again we have it: “The saints... in them is all my delight” (Psalm 16:3).
240
Scripture does not say anything about Lot escaping with his animals. It appears that it
was only his family that was to escape and even his sons in law did not escape as they were
sceptics (Genesis 19:14).
241
Comparing Genesis 19 with Judges 19: in the former passage the evil was in the world,
whereas in Judges the evil was amongst the people of God who, we may say, should have
known better. However, in both cases the evil was dealt with severely, even though, as Dr.
Dawkins notes, the victim in Judges was a woman !
Neither Abraham nor anyone else in Scripture, except for Christ, is a role model in any
absolute way. All those who have something of their life history given to us in Scripture were
shown to have failings, except perhaps for Joseph, Elisha and Daniel.
242
The story of the sacrificing of Isaac is taken as a picture of God sparing not his own
Son but delivering him up for us all (Romans 8:32). In the case of Isaac a ram was substituted
so that no actual sacrifice of Isaac took place. In any case God had promised Abraham that in
Isaac a seed would be called to him (Genesis 21:12). Abraham believed this and hence said: “I
and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you” (Genesis 22:5). The writer of
Hebrews makes it clear that Abraham believed that God would raise up Isaac again if he
sacrificed him (Hebrews 11:17-19). The passage in Genesis is not a passage to justify human
sacrifices generally (see Jeremiah 32:34/35).
243
As to the story of Jephthah’s daughter: Scripture does not justify what Jephthah did. If
the passage has a lesson for us it is that we should not make rash vows. Scripture says
elsewhere : “When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it, for he hath no pleasure in
fools” (Ecclesiastes 5:2-7 ).
244
Dr. Dawkins writes of “one calamitous occasion, a golden calf”. What about the
golden calves that Jeroboam installed in Bethel and in Dan (1 Kings 12:25-33).
245
Were the Midianites slandered ? Dr. Dawkins thinks they were. What is the proof ?
Balak had called for Baalam to curse Israel (Numbers 23:7/8). Was that a nice thing to do ?
246
Dr. Dawkins speaks of “offering your daughter for a gang rape” - a reference, I
suppose, to Judges 19:24. In any case judgment fell on the Sodomites and the Benjaminites for
their evil. The dismembering of the body of the concubine was no doubt intended to shock
Israel into doing something. Scripture takes a severe line about the matter particularly because
the city was an Israelite one and not a Jebusite one (Judges 19:11-15).
As is often the case in my experience, people will condemn severely evil done against
other people, but evil Godward does not matter much apparently. Cain was wrong in his
service Godward before he slew his brother Abel (Genesis 4). Dr. Dawkins does not see the
seriousness of idolatry, but I would point out that Judges 17/18 comes before Judges 19, that
is, idolatry in Dan comes before the evil in Benjamin.
247
Dr. Dawkins does not consider that Israel was not allowed to conquer Canaan until the
iniquity of the Amorites was full (Genesis 15:16).
248
We are not under the law of Moses. The law was given to Israel, not Gentiles. Many
Christians make the mistake of thinking they are under it. This does not mean we cannot learn
things from it, just as we may be able to from the laws of the United States if we live in
England. Even if we are converted Jews, the Mosaic law does not apply to us as we are
regarded as having “died with Christ” (Colossians 2:20). Baptism involves this and why
immersion is to be preferred to Christening (Colossians 2:12) See also Galatians 3:27/28.
250
Dr. Dawkins professes to like the sermon on the mount, but I wonder what he thinks of
the reference to hell (Gehenna) (Matthew 5:22, 29 & 30).
It may sound strange to us for someone to address his Mother as Woman. Christ does
on two occasions (see John 2:4; 19:26 ), but He is not the only one that addresses a lady as
Woman (see Luke 22:57). Christ also addresses others as Woman (see Matthew 15:28; Luke
13:12; John 4:21; 8:10; 20:15) In the case of our Lord we would have to consider that He may
have had in mind to pre-empt any idea that Mary was the Mother of God. This is noticeable
particularly when He was on the cross and said to his Mother: “Woman, behold thy son”, but
to the disciple that was almost certainly John: “Behold thy mother” (John 19:26/27).
Christ was not advocating people abandoning their families, but making the point that
He should have the first place being who He is. Today there are people who are in religious
associations that they judge to be wrong, but they do not leave them because their families
would throw them out or desert them. Christ made provision for his Mother when He was on
the cross (see quote in the last paragraph). When Simon and Andrew followed Christ they did
not desert their household (see Mark 1:29-31). When a person is called to go in the army he
does not desert his family though he has to leave them while he is on active service. It should
be noted that the passage Dr. Dawkins quotes says: “and his own life too” (Luke 14:26). Paul
exemplifies this saying: “I make no account of [my] life [as] dear to myself” (Acts 20:24). We
need to see what Christ means when he says things like hate his own Father and Mother.
Another Gospel shows that Christ should be loved more than our nearest relatives (Matthew
10:37). Much more could be said on this subject.
251
There is nothing about making atonement for ‘original sin’ in the Scriptures.
Atonement is made for souls (e.g. Exodus 30:15) or for their sin (e.g. Exodus 32:30). The
expression original sin does not appear in the Scriptures. The taking of the forbidden fruit (a
mild misdemeanour to us) led in the next chapter to Cain’s murder of his Brother Abel. What
Adam and Eve did was to let Satan in by, what we might call, the thin edge of the wedge.
252
If Judas did what he did at the behest of Jesus, why did he return the money he had
been given and then commit suicide ? John points out that “he was a thief and had the bag,
and carried what was put into [it]”. (John 12:4-6). He had been wrong a long time before he
delivered up Christ. Dr. Dawkins gives the impression of simply trying to find things in
Scripture or other writings to discredit the Gospels, both historically and morally.
It appears that Dr. Dawkins hates the idea of the cross. This is not a new hate. Paul
says: “We preach Christ and him crucified, to Jews an offence, and to nations foolishness...”
(1 Corinthians 1:23). On the other hand Christians boast in the cross of Christ (Galatians
6:14). The cross of Christ makes nothing of us (Galatians 2:20).
253
Dr. Dawkins refers to the Epistle to the Hebrews as Paul’s Epistle. I am inclined to
think it was, but there is no cast iron proof that I am aware of.
Not all believe that Adam and Eve were symbolic. People who read Scripture in that
way simply play into the hands of people like Dr. Dawkins. What he gives them they deserve.
Picking and choosing what we will believe in the Bible is a foolish practice. If we do that the
Bible’s authority is undermined (see my web site article “Was it just coincidence”).
254
That Christ was not limited in his mind to the Jews is clear from Scripture. Consider
his parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10) and his interview with the woman at Sychar’s
well (John 4). Then again there was the incident with the Syro-Phenician woman (Mark 7:26)
and the case of the centurion (Luke 7:2-10). What about his reference to the woman of Sarepta
and Naaman the Syrian (Luke 4) ? What Dr. Dawkins says is not new. I expect he has got it
from books as the ideas have been around a long time.
257
Paul took the Gospel to the nations afar off on Christ’s instructions (Acts 22:21).
Christ was only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24). The Gospel went
out to the Jew first, but when they refused it the word went to the nations (Acts 28:28). Christ
certainly had in mind to build his own assembly (church), so his mind was not limited to
Judaism (Matthew 16:18). He also spoke of there being one flock which would not be limited
to those within the Jewish fold (John 10:16). A lot of the problem in seeing this is that the
Scriptural record is only accepted when it accords with our preconceived thoughts which in
the case of an atheist means, when it does not involve accepting any divine element.
259
As to Northern Ireland, I have had Protestant friends in England who had a certain
sympathy with the Catholics, but it did not stop them staying as friends with Northern Ireland
Protestants who favoured the Loyalist cause.
There are a lot of things that are not evil, but are not wise (Exclusive Brethren got into
a mess partly because they could not see the difference). Marrying someone of a different
religious persuasion can cause problems. It appears that there were religious differences in
Darwin’s household, although not apparently leading to open rupture, they did cause
difficulties.
Jews had to keep racial purity; hence the prohibition against marrying Gentiles.
However, a look at Christ’s ancestry in Matthew shows that there were foreigners in it - at
least Rachab and Ruth the Moabitess.
263
If we go by Scripture, the knowledge of good and evil came in when Adam and Eve
sinned (Genesis 3:22). Since then we all have it, though we may need to have our senses
exercised to distinguish between the two (Hebrews 5:14).
265
The Scriptures speak of bondmanship as a good thing but not slavery, which is man’s
perversion of it. See my web site article “Bondmanship”. Women were never just chattels in
the Scriptures. Abraham listened to Sarah for example (Genesis 21:12). The idea that women
were chattels is an idea brought in to justify today what is called Woman’s Lib. I have
experienced this sort of thing amongst Exclusive Brethren. They over-emphasise the need to
avoid some evil in one direction to justify them in going to an evil extreme in another. There
is what may be called creatorial order. God is at the top and it flows down through Christ to
the man and then to the woman (1 Corinthians 11:3).It is a question of headship rather than
lordship. What is happening in the Western world today ? Marriages are breaking down all
over the place with attendant misery and financial hardship in many cases. There has to be a
hierarchy in government, the army and in business. Why not also in a household ?
266
Every race has its strengths and weaknesses, just as individuals do. With races it is a
matter of tendencies. Good memories may be more prevalent in some races than others.
Thieving may be more prevalent in some races than others. We do not want to turn a blind eye
to these things. See my web site article “The Black Races in Scripture”.
269
Today things get wrongly named. ‘Mentally handicapped’ becomes ‘Learning
disabilities’. This can be misleading because persons may have learning disabilities such as
dyslexia, but not be silly. Today, saying that someone has learning disabilities is often taken to
mean that they have Downs Syndrome or something of the kind.
Being a real Christian, as distinct from paying lip service to Christianity, is something
that Christ stresses, although the word Christian did not come into use until after Christ had
left this scene (Matthew 15:8).
In writing much of what is said above one has had the feeling that one has said a lot of
it before and that much of what Dr. Dawkins is writing is something of a rehash of what he
has said in his earlier books. It is true that one should expect some overlap, but he is often
repeating arguments which have been shown to be clearly wrong (see my commentaries on his
earlier books).
April 14 2007
th
