The God Delusion - an Appraisal  - Appendix 8

   

Appendix 8 - Facts, Formulas & Freaky Behaviour

 

Return to Appendices Contents Page

 

    

Appendix 8 : Facts, Formulas and Freaky Behaviour

 

 

 

In the Prefaces of The God Delusion, Richard is completely defensive and seeks to undermine any criticism that might be coming his way – yet still does all the things he says he won't do. This page picks up on one of those things.

 

In Appendix 5 – Bad Thinking in the Book, I have already considered in the second part, the failure to distinguish between Principles and Practice, but so important is it in both The God Delusion and other similar books by atheists, that I believe it needs a separate consideration.

   

  

1. Facts

 

The God Delusion is remarkably short on facts or evidences of the Christian faith. Perhaps we may summarise the essential ingredients for faith as:

  • awareness of the records of God's existence and activity, and why we can be confident in them,
  • awareness of the basic teaching, as stated in those records, of the way God relates to humans and how He, as stated, wants us to respond to Him, and
  • awareness of the existence of God through experiences, checked against the records.

     

Now I am trying to be as simple as possible here using non-religious language.

 

Put another way, the basic facts or evidences that we have to play with are:

      • Biblical and non-Biblical documents that exist,
      • the content of them that point to a conclusion, and
      • experiences (historical and present) measured against them.

        

Although these three things sound simple, they actually provide an enormous volume of evidence to be weighed – but they are the factual evidence and they are not well considered in The God Delusion. It appears that Richard and his followers are very largely ignorant of these things.

 

Note: It's a good idea if you are a Christian to be knowledgeable of these things.

 

 

2. Formulas

 

Now from the three things above come beliefs.

 

For example we may say we believe in the credibility of the Biblical documents because we have carefully studied what we have in museums around the world, and what we know from history about how they came into being.

 

We may say we believe they are inspired by God who prompted men to write, by the evidence of what was written and the nature of it. (These are simplified statements just to make the point).

 

We may say we believe in the existence of God because of the nature of the documents, and the content of them, perhaps combined with the life experiences we have that are spoken about in the documents.

 

We may say we believe that Jesus was and is the Son of God who came to earth roughly two thousand years ago because of the nature of what was written in the New Testament about him, and of the content of what was said about him, perhaps together with what was said about him by other historical documents, combined with the life experiences we have spoken about in those documents that come as a result of believing in him.

 

So, please note that these formulas of belief are what flow out the facts of evidences of the first part above. If you are ignorant of the first part above, then naturally your beliefs may be all over the place and very far from the traditional Biblical Christian Faith. It is perhaps no wonder that the belief systems of Richard and his followers are all over the place.

 

Note: It is a good idea if you are a Christian to be clear about the basic beliefs at least, that flow out of the above.

 

 

3. Freaky Behaviour

 

Now beliefs are the precursor to behaviour. If we are unclear about the facts and about the formulas that flow from the facts, then our behaviour may be what I am lightly calling here, ‘freaky' – and there's a lot of freaky behaviour in the world, and that includes the Christian world.

 

Now if you will allow me to use ‘freaky' to include any behaviour that is contrary to the natural outworking of the obvious beliefs that flow out in the traditional Biblical Christian Faith, then included under the umbrella of ‘freaky' would be:

  • strange goings on of various popes and other apparent leaders throughout the history of the church,
  • a variety of ‘traditions' added in by the Roman Catholic church,
  • any attitudes or behaviours that run directly contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ,
  • cults that promulgate belief systems directly contrary to that found in Scripture,
  • weird rites practised by church groups with no foundation in the New Testament.

 

Why should such ‘freaky' behaviour exist? Because people still have free will, may be untaught, badly taught or wrongly taught, or may just do their own thing.

 

Remember this is the outworking of wrong beliefs or absence of right beliefs that should be based on the facts or evidences in part 1 above.

Note: It is a good idea if you are a Christian to abstain from freaky behaviour!

 

 

And So…

 

One of Richard's techniques, both here and in his TV programmes, is to lean heavily on freaky behaviour which is simply human misbehaviour.

 

In his Preface he objects to the criticism “You go after crude, rabble rousing chancers like….” and then, “To the vast majority of believers around the world, religion all too closely resembles what you hear from the likes of ……”

 

Now I'm not going to include the lists of names that he adds in those quotes because I don't want to be part of character assassination. He may or may not be right. But essentially what he is saying is that most religion is portrayed by freaky characters!

 

EVEN IF that was true, that doesn't deny the truths about God revealed by the facts and evidences that I referred to above; it simply says that human beings are terrible at responding to the truth.

 

However, I am convinced that the vast majority of religious believers around the world DO NOT resemble what you hear from such people. This is simply Richard displaying his absence of knowledge about the vast majority of believers.

 

I hold no brief to defend other world religions and think they have to come under their own close scrutiny, and should not be considered alongside Christianity. Christianity has a number of unique features and these need to be considered intelligently. Neither this distinction nor the intelligent consideration of Christianity appears in this book. That is not a negative about Christianity, but about the author.

 

In the past thirty years, the world has become much more doctrinaire and that is true of nationalism, politics generally, and of religion. That pedantic outworking of theoretical ideas has meant more violence, as extremists in whatever area have felt frustrated and vented their frustration through force.

 

As a Christian, I would hope that the Church would increasingly speak up against such violence, whether it comes as hostile words of disagreement, taking the law into your own hands, or of bringing violence within demonstrations against wrong. I believe we need to dissociate ourselves from the foolish words and foolish acts that are so often used as examples by the likes of Richard or other atheistic writers.

 

Such freaky acts detract from the truth and lead Richard and others to focus on them rather than on the facts and evidences, as can be clearly seen in The God Delusion.

 

Be clear in your own mind; you don't have to defend freaky people, but we do defend the truth, the facts and evidences that are clear to see by anyone who is willing to look.

 

 

 

   

  

Return to top of page

 

 
Return to Main Contents Page