Mental flab . ..

I missed my monthly (ideally) book club the other night. But I read the book, "God Delusion," which, according to the writing on the spine, was authored by Richard Dawkins, an evangelical atheist.

I never saw nor met Richard Dawkins as I read. He never appeared in the room with me. I've never seen or met the man anywhere else. So I have to assume that he does not exist.

To make matters worse, these words that are written in this book bearing the name of this imagined Dawkins have caused a lot of controversy and ill will among people who disagree about the existence of God. It has driven some to violence and hatred toward those who disagree. It is a shame that such harmful things are occurring because of the words of someone who apparently does not exist.

Yes, I am being silly. Of course Richard Dawkins exists. I enjoyed reading his book. It was entertaining.

I asssume that Mr. Dawkins is intelligent. He certainly does.

But it is quite an assumption. Almost an act of faith, if faith is the belief in something in the absence of evidence.

I do not make such a harsh observation because Mr. Dawkins does not believe as I believe. He makes some interesting and helpful observations about the historical failures of religion. I love a good discussion about the existence of God and related topics.

Sadly, his work lacks intellectual integrity.

It is sad because he seems to believe that he is introducing intellectual integrity to those who choose to believe in a supernatural God.

Dawkins attacks the baseless assumptions of all religions. They have no basis in fact or evidence. I don't know about other religions, but mine makes no bones about it, the belief is absolutely not based on fact. It is ultimately based on an assumption. Faith.

The existence of God, or His character, if He exists, is not affected at all by what Richard Dawkins or Bob Bentley thinks about it. It is what it is or isn't.

The ironic and irritatingly disengenuous characteristic of Dawkins argument is that his "logic" is the same as the most ardent, narrow, Bible thumping, close minded Christian of which he is so condescendingly critical. The Bible says it, I believe it, and that's all there is. But a Christian who is being true to the teachings of Jesus must admit that he cannot prove what he believes. It is all by faith.

That is our intellectual choice. It may be a simple child like choice, or it may the the reasoned choice of someone like C. S. Lewis. But ultimately it is a choice based on faith in things not seen. Perhaps it is foolish. But it is our choice.

Just as it is Dawkins' choice, and it appears to be a reasoned choice, to believe there is no God. But he can no more prove that assumption than I can prove mine. He just refuses to admit it.

In the beginning of the book, Dawkins co-opts Einstein as if he were his associate. (Dawkins is also quite a name dropper). He distinguishes Einstein's view of God,using Einstein's quote about God that includes the line: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate . . ." Einstein did not believe in a personal God. He believed in the harmony and structure of those things that we know to exist, and in the wonder and awe of knowledge that there exists a reality that we have not yet penetrated.

Dawkins assumes that there is no intelligent creator. He assumes that there is much of reality that we have not yet, as Einstein said, penetrated. He assumes that God is not part of the unknown reality. But he never admits that what he believes about the unknown is by definition an assumption. Faith.

It is just intellectually lazy. I expected more.

.