Science's Pat Robertson
That's the pithy name given by John Derbyshire to "Darwin's Rottweiler", Richard Dawkins. Christians who cringe every time Robertson, ostensibly on their side, opens his mouth will perhaps feel empathy for scientists who read malarkey like this:
"The God of the Old Testament has got to be the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous, and proud of it, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist," he says. Dawkins then criticizes Abraham, compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and calls the New Testament "St Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin."
That sobriquet is just laugh-out-loud funny, and I hope it sticks.
posted by Craig at 13:25
4 Comments:
I don't know (and the article doesn't mention) the context of the Moses comparison, so I can't give an opinion on that.
But otherwise, his characterization of the old testament is quite accurate, don't you think? Jealous, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist. It doesn't take more than a few nights of Gideon-provided hotel reading to confirm this. The god the old testament describes is quite a sadomasochistic, insecure being.
I find other mythologies to be a lot more interesting and poetic than the Judeochristian ones.
The whole point is that, like Robertson for the Christians, a lot of what he's saying is based on something you might agree with, but he goes off the rails. When you compare Moses to Hitler you've left the realm of reasonable debate, no matter what the context. This guy is just a cringe-making buffoon.
Heinlein had a better way of putting it: "Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child."
...left the realm of reasonable debate, no matter what the context
I'm not sure of that. Let me try:
"Moses and Hitler both had an enormous influence in the history of the Jewish people." (I'm pretending here I accept that Moses existed--but that is another topic)
Dawkins is usually controversial and outrageous. But I don't believe that from the article you linked follows that he went off the rails. Not without an accurate quote.
In any case, I am glad that someone in his position would make those opinions public. It is intellectually very sad than theism demands more respect than any other irrational set of beliefs.
That's hardly a ringing defense, and a Clintonian parsing of "context".
The point is that he may be (mostly) right, and I may even agree with a lot that he believes. But if he really compared (as in tried to equate) Moses, Hitler, and Hussein, the guy is an embarassment.
The Pat Robertson metaphor holds.
Post a Comment
<< Home