Richard Dawkin’s Lecture at Randolph College October 5th 2011
My thoughts:
Scientifically sound.
Intellectually stimulating.
Humorous, but sometimes coarse.
“In your face” rah-rah session for atheists.
Public scorn and ridicule of virtually all (and especially Christian) religious folks.
Culturally enlightening.
Overall profoundly sad.
Sally and I thoroughly enjoyed the evening out together. The campus was beautiful and the warm still Virginia evening was spectacular. As we made the 30-minute drive over to the other side of Lynchburg, the Blue Ridge Mountains rose up to our left with the sparkling orange-red rays of the setting sun radiating from their oscillating peaks. Awesome. Illinois and Michigan views just don’t compare. We met Kathy, a biology faculty member from Randolph college with whom I have become acquainted at her office. She kindly helped us find the lecture hall – a high-vaulted ceiling with an overhead balcony. We arrived early, and chose seats in the balcony right over the lectern – a great vantage point of the event.
The lecture venue and college setting reminded us of another time we had attended a lecture at the University of Kansas in the fall of 1976 – a creation/evolution debate.
Following a short series of songs by a university choral group, there was a ten-minute pre-lecture by Sean Faircloth. Sean is a colleague of Dawkins at the Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason. He has written a book entitled, “Attack of the Theocrats.” His short presentation promoting his book made it very obvious that he has no use for religion and, in fact, views religion as an evil influence on American culture. He inserted his not-so-subtle “digs” at the local Liberty University fundamentalists several times.
Dawkins was much less antagonistic and used the time to talk about several chapters in his new book (just released this week), “The Magic of Reality.” This book is geared toward younger readers and addresses questions such as: What is reality? What is Magic? Who was the first person? Why do we have winter and summer? How did everything begin? Are we alone in the universe? What is a miracle?
The first question he addressed was, “Who was the first person?” He argued that there was no “first” person (No Adam and Eve), but rather that each person arises from a previous set of parents virtually the same as them. Then using a time- machine analogy, he described how the fossil record shows evolution and speciation events, and that if we followed the trail backward we would, 4000 generations (24 years per generation) in the past, observe a great-grandfather very similar to ourselves. At 50,000 generations ago, the great-grandfather would be homo-erectus. 250,000 generations ago reveal chimpanzee-like ape grandfathers, and so on all the way back through the evolutionary history of life on Earth. Dawkins is very confident of this data – as is the general scientific community.
In contrast, in addressing the second question, “Are we alone in the universe?” Dawkins is humble and openly admits that he does not know the answer. He did provide some very interesting facts regarding the number of solar systems that might have planets similar to Earth in the universe. The numbers are mind-numbing – billions and billions. So his tentative thought is that, given the enormous number of possible ‘Earth-like’ planets possible, he thinks it likely that we are not alone. That is interesting to consider, but it is depressing as well, since if Albert Einstein was right that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, even traveling at these rates, the “intelligent life planets” are so far removed from one another, they would never be able to contact one another.
The sold-out audience was an enthusiastic and engaged crowd, with frequent applause accompanying any derogatory reference to God, religion, Christians or Liberty University. During the question and answer period, one individual identified himself as a former Liberty University student who has now become a committed atheist. The crowd burst into applause at this personal confession, and Dawkins was quick to congratulate him in his ‘deliverance’ from the evils of Christian fundamentalism. Afterwards, while Sally and I waited in line to purchase books, I listened to the conversations of college students and locals who had attended. Mockery and derision toward religion and Jesus and Christianity were core elements of some of these conversations. Given the antagonism I had sensed during the evening, when I finally talked to Professor Dawkins one-on-one I asked him, “Do you believe all religion is harmful, or is it that you personally just have no use for it?” I told him the reason I asked this was because, as a lifelong Christian, I had seen so much good done in name of the faith it did not seem justified to say, in a blanket statement sort of way, that religion was primarily harmful. His response was, “You don’t have to be religious to be good.”
Sally and I were among the last to leave, and it was quite late. The night was quiet as we walked across the empty moonlit campus grounds to the parking lot. The lecture had been interesting and we were both glad we had made the effort to attend. But I was troubled by something.
It wasn’t the accuracy of the science: That was fine. It also wasn’t the fact that Dawkins is an atheist and that the message of the night had been primarily an atheistic message. No, what was troubling me, and that which struck me most profoundly was the extent of the pent-up anti-Christian fervor and hostility that we sensed in the audience. The intensity of this response really was something that I had not anticipated. As we talked, we wondered about the source of this anger toward Christians that was so pervasive in the crowd. You could sense there was more than just anger; there was personal and emotional pain.
Then it hit me. I turned to Sally and said, “They have been hurt.”
Maybe I am wrong, but I must confess that I departed both the 1976 creation/evolution debate and October 2011 event profoundly disappointed and, in each case, for the same reason – the failure of Christians to successfully articulate and live out a Jesus-modeling faith that welcomes and draws people rather than alienating and excluding them.
Hopefully there is a better future for the faith.
A very thought-provoking post. Working in the research/healthcare setting of a primarily secular academic institution, I have to echo the sentiment of disappointment in fellow Christians. Though many of my colleagues are mostly just indifferent to religion, the ones who are most outspokenly critical of it (in particular of Christianity) are those who seem to have a personal past with it. It makes me very sad to think that somewhere along the way, these individuals were “alienated and excluded” and to hear the bitterness and hatred with which they speak of that past.
When in Israel in 2008 I was horrified to see how much the Muslims there HATED us, young children screamed at us in the streets of Nazareth, where Jesus had lived, the small boy of no more than 5 years old screaming “Die Die Die, We are going to kill you!”. The small boy screaming at us was walking backwards & tripped, I caught him, he seemed Shocked I’d caught him & helped him not to fall… I asked myself over & over why so much HATE? I researched when I got home & learned their schoolchild are teaching them to HATE us! They are being told numerous lies, even that the Holocaust was a Hollywood movie that never happened! So I searched deeper, ‘Why God?’.
While in Chicago one day waiting for my dau., who was in a Symphony Orchestra there, id venture the stores there about, but on this day in particular there was a parade, a GAY parade! Oh my goodness, do they not know what the Bible says? Do they not care of the warnings God’s Word gives us?! The streets were filled, screaming, they claimed 10k were there supporting it, I wouldn’t disagree, they were everywhere, except in the store where I was, as we all watched in horror!
Conclussion? God told us, He warned us if we do this & that He will… He warned us that the devil will have his hour, but he does Not win the war! But what about all those lost souls? What about all those people who are going to suffer & die & live eternally away from God?! Oh if I’m wrong so be it, I’ve lived a life to help others & believe in a Creator GOD & Messiah JESUS. But if they are wrong, they really are hopelessly doomed! How do we stop this? Can it be stopped? Should we even try? Will their blood be on our heads if we don’t at least try?
Evil is everwhere, it’s even in the strictest sects of Amish, it’s in every religion, but there are good people too! When one sees a religion doing wrong, we all fall short of the glory of God & fail at times! But that is no reason to give up believing! That’s when we should put on the full Armour of God, unite & fight the evil ways of the devil! Not quit & run! United we will stand, divided we will fail! Those aren’t just Lincoln’s words, he was quoting the Holy Bible. Amen!
Sir,
I’m an atheist. I don’t hate Christians, I don’t hate Christianity.
I think this idea that we’re all angry and want to persecute Christians is an odd one. I appreciate that the idea that Christians are an oppressed minority and the world is against you is deep in the DNA of your tradition, but it’s simply not the case, certainly not in modern America. Someone is far more likely to suffer discrimination or sanctions from a Christian than as a result of their Christian faith.
What you saw I think, is a group of people who were in a place, for once in their life, where they *could* openly criticize Christianity for all the political and social harm it’s done in recent years. Mocking, I’m sure, but cheerfully, not cruelly. They were able to say that Christianity does great harm to women, to homosexuals, to academic standards and freedoms, to science education, politically, economically. They were able to say that without facing sanctions. For one moment, they could just smile and relax. You nailed it by calling it ‘pent up’. Ask yourself why it is pent up. Who is stifling the exchange of ideas? Atheists?
As for what we’re faced with, see, for example, how quickly Lesa, the previous respondent, elides from ‘isn’t hatred terrible’ to homophobic rants? Did you hear anyone at this meeting who sounded as angry and irrational as Lesa sounds talking about the devil? Would you like to call Lesa out for that, explain why it’s at the very least hypocritical?
I accord Christianity exactly the same respect I do for anything else, and that respect includes my comfort in criticizing where criticism is due, in questioning, in calling out ideas or actions that are harmful or foolish. Good ideas needn’t fear a little sarcasm, and I honestly think that’s all you were exposed to that evening.
Hi Steve Jeffers,
Thanks for commenting. I appreciate your interest. I think you extend my comments beyond what was intended. I simply reported what I saw that night. BUT I did not say, nor do I believe that all atheists are hostile to Christianity. My criticism here, (if there was any) is actually not of the atheists in the crowd. They were simply expressing their heartfelt convictions: My critique and call to action is of Christians.
I believe you are correct in your assessment that many of these folks have observed great harm done “in the Name of Christianity”. We have all observed these things. So if you read my post more carefully, I believe that you will see that I am challenging Christians to set a better example in their statements, beliefs, and interactions with others. So, in response to your statements, you seem to think (a view seemingly shared by many atheists) that since much evil or harm has been done “in the name of God”, that this justifies a conclusion that Christianity is bad/evil/harmful to our culture and society. I think you fail to see the situation in a proper balanced manner. Have you ever noticed how much incredible good is done “in the name of God or Christianity or other religious belief? That is also a reality of our world!
Thanks for stopping by.
Rick Colling
And thank you for posting my comment.
First of all, let me apologize for the way my comments came across – I think internet discussion tends to polarize and sound more aggressive and posturing than the same words would with two people talking.
Christianity and the vast majority of Christians have been wonderful, continue to be. Now, I could speculate how much of this is nice people being nice, and how much of it is motivated by religion. My personal aesthetic preference is that if you give a hungry man a sandwich because you think God would like you to, that’s not as moral an act as giving the man a sandwich simply because he’s hungry. In the end, what matters is that the hungry get fed, and the organizational ability of churches to get that done is often very impressive. Christians have fed more people than I have.
I know that people within denominations are often far more acutely and personally aware of the problems within those organizations, and I wouldn’t want to suggest otherwise.
I think one of these is tribalism. In it’s simplest form, if I say I’m an atheist and someone I disagree with is a Christian, then I think it’s fair to say that the vast majority of Christians would at least lean towards the other guy. Some of that is a perfectly sensible survival strategy, or was in the past, but I think that it encourages a closing of ranks. The troubles of the Catholic Church, say, are entirely self inflicted. It was not atheists getting in through cracks in the walls abusing those children, the existence of the wall allowed abuse to continue.
And this leads to what I’d say is a big systemic problem with Christianity – with God as *such* an overwhelming authority figure, His representatives on Earth are always going to face less challenge from their flocks. It’s the ultimate trump card to any argument, particularly when humility, respect, submission, meekness, subservience or other (often very positive) attitudes of that nature are emphasized.
The medieval Church believed that the Pope was *more* likely to fall into heresy, because he represented a target for the Devil, and had such wealth and power. The Pope was *more* fallible than the average man. Somewhere along the way, we’ve come to understand that this is true of our political leaders, but believers have failed to recognize this of their religious leaders.
Thanks for your time, and I think we agree about many things, even if one of them isn’t the God Thing. And that, I hope, is a message a lot more people come to understand.
Thanks for the comments Steve. I understand the crux of your thoughts very well, perhaps better than you might think. Tribalism is indeed alive and well (as are the Pharisees of Jesus time) within the Christian organizations/denominations. And the tribe tends to protect and defend their leaders REGARDLESS of facts and truth. For example, if one hears conflicting accounts of a situation in a Christian organization from an “esteemed” religious leader or a scientist, I can tell you with confidence, regardless of truth and facts, who will be believed and trusted. Here are some facts: Christian leaders are not above flat-out lies and intentional misrepresentation if it is their image or reputation on the line. These religious leaders have been lauded and praised by their congregations/constituencies for so long that I think they actually begin to believe that they are incapable of wrongdoing or speaking falsehood. In other words, the words they speak MUST be true, just because the words are being spoken by them. In addition, members of the Christian tribe support and enable this pathetic pathology. And why not? They are lectured from the pulpit each week to respect and honor their “esteemed” religious leaders. Surely our leaders could never (sic) do anything wrong, lie, or misrepresent reality…
While I harbor no ill-will toward religious leaders in general, I am acutely aware that the situation lends itself to abuse of power. And I can tell you from personal experience, that this abuse arising from blind tribal support happens all the time.
Now that is very sad. FYI: I am an advocate for harmony between science and faith – evolution and christian faith. I wrote a chapter for a book “The Christian College Phenomenon” which just came out last week. The title of the chapter is “Evolution and Christian Faith”. If you are interested, I will send you the text. In addition, there is also a film coming out soon titled “From the Dust” (Or it may still be under ” A Leap of Truth”). This film demonstrates that not all Christians want to be members of the establishment Christian tribe when it comes to seeking truth and understanding of our world.
The link to the film trailer is here:
http://vimeo.com/23533521
I have a part in this project designed to help the tribe go deeper.
Best to you, and thanks again for dropping by the blog.
Rick
Thank you again. I would love to read the article you mentioned – I’m at steveatone@gmail.com.
Hey Dr.Colling….thanks for continuing to write. The trailer for “From The Dust”, looks great, and I’m looking forward to its release. I was reminded of you recently when I read “Mr. G” by Alan Lightman. It’s definitely not a “christian fiction” book….but presents a “random-creator” in a unique way for sure. You may have already heard of it or the author. But if not, you may enjoy it! Hope all is well, and God bless….
Thanks for the note. Sorry it took so long to respond. I only check this blog infrequently. I have written the last chapter for the book put out by the Coalition of Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) that was released in October. The book title is “The Christian College Phenomenon”. The chapter title is “Evolution and Christian Faith”. It was nice to be able to say what really needed to be said without having to deal with aggressive ignorance of Christian/church leaders. if you would like a copy of the chapter, let me know. I can email you an unformatted version.