I have previously proved that The God Delusion is a funny book.
Now, let us consider that it is equally amusing.
Indeed, Richard Dawkins states, “I put it in this rather, Id like to think, amusing way.”
What else can he say when The God Delusion was first proclaimed by him to have the power of converting the faithful.
Then to merely influence those sitting on the fence.
And, finally, a funny and amusing book that has been picked apart for the carrion that it is.
Here is the quote within context:
I suppose the most strident passage in The God Delusion is where I talk about how the God of the Old Testament is the most unpleasant character in all fiction. I had this long list of adjectives: homophobic, infanticidal.
Thats kind of using long words, long Latinate words to describe what everybody actually knows: that the God of the Old Testament is a monster. I put it in this rather, Id like to think, amusing way…Well in that particular passage Im only talking about the God of the Old Testament, so the only people who will be offended are the people who believe in the God of the Old Testament…if they actually read the Old Testament, they could not fail to agree with what I said.
The God of the Old Testament is a monster. Its very, very hard for anybody to deny that. Hes like a hyped-up Ayatollah Khomeini.1
He referred to stridency because within the very same interview he plays the victim in stating, “I would be glad if you didnt use the word ‘strident.’ Im getting a little bit tired of it.” I would imagine that he is nowhere near as tired of being referred to as “strident” as we are of him being strident.
So, “The God of the Old Testament is a monster” come on now—that is just amusing.
So, “the God of the Old Testament is the most unpleasant character in all fiction”—that is just amusing.
But note his point, “if they actually read the Old Testament, they could not fail to agree with what I said.”
Well, I believe that I read somewhere that at least one person who lived in the past few millennia actually read the Old Testament and dared to disagree with Richard Dawkins.
In fact, note that even Richard Dawkins disagrees with Richard Dawkins as he knows that, in his view, 1) “The God of the Old Testament” merely survived as the fittest God-meme, 2) the moral zeitgeist is such that way back then those actions were not immoral and 3) in an atheistic universe there is no transcendent/ultimate/ binding ethos.
Thus, his condemnations—about anything and everything—amount to mere bio-chemically induced arguments from outrage based on his personal preferences which are premised on his personal preferences.
The fact that he makes such amusing comments from the safety, comfort and lucrativeness and freedom of the UK and USA (countries founded upon Judeo-Christian principles) while not daring to do likewise about any other culture/religion/theology is part of the reason that the New Atheist movement is dead.
- 1. Lisa Miller, “Darwin’s Rottweiler - Richard Dawkins on his tense relations with those who believe in God,” Newsweek, Sep 26, 2009