I thought some of you might be interested in the response I got from the Christian who inspired blog post about the Christian's question about Dawkins hating God. I published that same post on my personal blog and he responded to it there - http://tinyurl.com/yj5rjpp
; If you want to see my response to him, follow the link. It's way too long to post his response and my reply here.
"you're right, many people have bible verses to back up their actions of
hatred, but do they have good hermenuetics. Did they read the bible to
extract meaning for their lives or did they read it to justify their
actions. Of course, the same accusations can be made of atheists who
read the bible simply to disprove it. They are reading with an
ill-motive and it might be difficult to see what the words truly mean.
The bible, the words of God, was meant to transform your life and I
agree that many have instead transformed the bible into something
monstrous. I find it takes more than just reading a few wise quotes,
but it takes reading, studying, and meditating on the words and
meaning, then applying it to one's life. That is how true Christians
grows in an individual. It is actually both subjective and objective.
It is both reason based and emotional.
Well don't take it
personal, I am willing to accept you, just not your faith. Yes, your
faith. Your faith/belief is far to great for me to handle. As I said
before, it is the Christian duty to love the world as God did. So if
you meet someone who says they are a Christian but don't, atleast,
respect you because you're a fellow human being, that Christian has no
place with God. Though I can't guarantee this, but if all Christians
were kind and loving to Dawkins, he might actually have become a
I willingly consent to your point about atheists
hating God. That is a very good point and my mistake for calling one
such as yourself hateful. On the other hand, in this great United
States you will find atheist teachers who refuses to teach creation as
a viable alternative to evolution. In my mind, I count that as a form
of hate. NOt just for the religious institution itself. But for the
values that Christianity holds sacred.
in reponse to the
slave comment: I agree with you, it is quite difficult to build a
bridge of communication and respect between two people who hate each
other. And many people have lost their lives in that struggle. But I
guarantee you that it is a worth while struggle. Martin Luther King jr,
was not great simply because he was black. But he was great because he
was treated as a slave, yet he rose above it with a dream of peace
between the two races. I don't get from Dawkins's books that he's much
of a peacemaker. That doesn't seem to be his agenda.
apologize ahead of time for the harsh words I'm about to write. But
Dawkins seem more like a revolutionary. And not one who is looking for
good communication. All his efforts seem like he wants to out do
Christianity; the billboards, the books, and the institutions he has
started. He has expressed his feelings clearly, but his expressions
based on ill facts can be detrimentally fatal. Especially if he
develops a following. Like a blind leading a blind, they are bound to
fall into a pit. If Dawkins is incorrect about his feelings, you and
all the other atheists who follow his writing are in serious trouble.
And blaming a few bad Christians will not cause you to escape this one."
Is it just me, or does this person seem tragically misinformed about atheism and atheists in general? Anyway, I don't feel like addressing his response all over again, I just thought his reaction to that post was interesting and that those who responded to the original post themselves would be interested in the atheist vs. theist response.