THE GOD DELUSION.

As a prelude to the Christmas season can I make a plea
to all my fans out there in blog-world? Please do not put
a copy of Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" in my
Christmas stocking!

It seems to me that this guy has achieved a prominence
way beyond his abilities by making a career out of winding
up Christians like myself. Our protestations of innocence at
his anti-religion scattergun diatribes only boost his notoriety
and his subsequent book sales. The real challenge Dawkins
presents us with is not his huffing and puffing but our own
internal urge to rise to his bait!

The best thing to do is ignore him. So my New Year's
Resolution is; his name will not appear again in this blog.

For Richard Dawkins' fans out there let me pose a challenge
to you. In "The Sunday Telegraph" review section 'Seven'
published in the UK on 17th the Dawkins' line about religion
is repeated that killing is 'something you might well do if
you've been taught from babyhood upwards that your God
will approve of such behaviour. You don't have to produce
evidence to support your belief. You simply say, "It's my
faith", and are blind to any argument. If part of your faith is
the righteousness of killing infidels or apostates, then that
does seem to me to go further than the ordinary aggression
which you [the interviewer] attribute to humans anyway.'

Well I suppose you might think that given such a scenario
- just as any secular demagogue did with their dissidents.
The issue is; is the nature of religious faith inherently evil
in a way that, say, totalitarianism is not? Apparently
Dawkins would say 'yes'. I don't rate his chances at having
a cosy chat with the likes of Robespierre, Stalin or Pol Pot....
but hey what do I know? I suspect that what Dawkins really
means is not that rational argument is impossible with those
of a religious persuasion, but that such a dialogue is
impossible for him! And that is quite a different matter.
Dawkins may well lack the empathy required for reasoned
discussion but it is illogical to conclude that no-one else can
do it either. To have a rational argument requires making
some attempt to understand the other person's rationale and
just because it is not his rationale does not mean that there
is not a rationale; Dawkins doesn't have to agree with it to
try to understand it. At least you and I are managing to have
a reasonable discussion right now aren't we?

I don't know why I take this so personally because I don't
recognise Dawkins' caricature - maybe I'm more sensitive
than most. Okay the challenge is this: let's get down to
cases, search my blog and find some evidence for the
notion that I advocate killing people. Go a step further -
search the audio library of my church - there are several
decades worth of talks there - where is the evidence that
anyone there has ever urged violence? http://www.shmedia.org.uk/
He says it's from babyhood - okay; check out the Sunday
School material at http://www.tntministries.org.uk/ - where is the
proof that children are being taught to kill in God's name?
And remember - in all of this - we are not discussing
whether Christians fail to live by the principles they advocate,
but whether those principles are themselves inherently evil
....that is the 'Dawkins Doctrine'.

The Christian position is that God alone has the right to
judge an individuals' heart - I cannot do it because I do
not know what God knows. Not only that but I have no
right to do this in God's name because I too am a sinner,
who will be judged against the measure I use! And there's
the rub - one would have to construe God's deferred
judgement as a present day mandate. The Gospel requires
me to forgive others on the basis that God in Christ has
forgiven me. The petty grievances I nurture must be
relinquished in the light of the forgiveness of God I've
received. Those of you who have suffered some dreadful
crime must also seek to forgive but that ability to forgive
one's enemies is not founded upon a shrug of the shoulders
in a "it doesn't matter", vague, sort of way. It is founded on
the ability to commit our deepest wounds to a just God, who
sees all our hurts and who judges wisely, and to whom we
and our assailants will one day be required to give a full
account. Furthermore as a Christian I cannot despise a fellow
sinner because 'there but for the grace of God go I!' God's
love is expressed in two ways - his love of mercy and his love
of justice. I cannot see how he'll square that circle - but I
trust that he can do it - and in reality that is what 'faith' is,
trusting in the character of God revealed in Christ.

If you find this murderous evidence I'll join you on your side
of the barricade - and you know who else will be there?
Jesus! You might not have heard that he taught his disciples
to 'turn the other cheek' and 'love your enemies' etc and
the apostle Paul also concurs in Romans 12v14-21. [I do not
mean to be patronising in saying all this; if you source your
information from the likes of Dawkins you may well not know
that it is upon Jesus that the Christian attitude to others is
to be founded]. Of course you will find 'crack pots' if
you look hard enough [you find them in every society] but
it is entirely disingenuous to talk up these examples as
representative.

In fact there is an interesting scrap between Jesus and
his disciples in Luke chapter 9 v51-56 which is very inform-
ative. Jesus is en route to Jerusalem and is passing through
a Samaritan village which rejects him; his disciples ask if
he wants them to call down fire from heaven on the villagers.
Jesus rebukes his apostles and continues his weary way to
The Cross.







tagline: Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. Dawkins' God Delusion.

Postscript: for further reading can I recommend Alister McGrath's
"Dawkins' God". Blackwell Publishing ISBN-13: 978-11-4051-2538-3.

Laodicea.

This is the seventh (and final) church in the opening chapters of
the Book of Revelation; and it is here that the Autumn term of
"Central Focus" concludes. Our Bible Study resumes in January in
chapter 4. These seven churches are being evaluated by the Risen
Christ; they all face challenges; a couple are commended, most
are censured, none are without hope.

It seems to me that unless "religion" results in meaningful, self-
critical reflection then such belief systems can only ever serve as
'flags of convenience' for whatever tribe we identify with. It marks
out "us" from "them" in our tribal conflicts and the values we
ostensibly hold to are in reality subverted to other ends. We take
God's name in vain when we claim his endorsement of such conflict
and we will have to give an account for that one day. The chief
problem of the Laodicean church is its complacency and self
satisfaction - the horrifying thing about it is that Jesus Christ is
outside seeking admission! This is a church where the 'life' of the
organisation happily ticks over and Christ is not at the heart of
it.

The challenge is to examine our own hearts and see where we
have subtly excluded Jesus and settled for mediocrity. It is that
lukewarm notion of 'faith' that the Lord finds so nauseating. "Be
zealous and repent" he says. This is not to be zealous for the sake
of being zealous - this is to be passionate about Jesus and the
priorities he has. Of course being a 'zealot' is so un-english and is
so uncool; but maybe that is the cost of discipleship for us!

A Tale of Two Cities.

Leeds and Bradford are two West Yorkshire cities less than ten miles apart
but their fortunes could hardly be more different. Bradford is my home town
and every time I visit it I genuinely want to like the place but such efforts on
my part are tinged with pathos. Even now I still love the night-time view from
Carr Lane across the city. But the close knit (not to mention stifling) working
class suburbs with flagstone paving and cobbled streets have long since vanished.

I find it sad to hear my relatives speak of the place in more prosperous
times when Bradford was at the heart of the worsted (wool textile) industry.
Once upon a time it hosted several department stores and had some real
civic pride. But textiles went into decline decades ago and Bradford hasn't
been able to find a new niche in the world; or so it seems to me.

The poverty of the place is reflected in the shops in the town centre - all
the major stores have relocated and have been replaced by shop squats
and discount stores. How many such shops does a place need?

Leeds in contrast seems ever more prosperous, having sensibly
pedestrianised the city centre [though this makes for some fiendishly difficult
traffic systems!] The range of shops there is quite astonishing; Helen & I
often do our Christmas shopping here rather than London! Leeds has a
cafe culture 'buzz' about it. I certainly enjoyed living in Leeds during the
1980s before I moved to London.

Another feature of the contrasting cities is how in the 1960's Leeds kept its
Victorian buildings when Bradford was happily demolishing what was then
regarded as its thoroughly unfashionable heritage. I bet the city fathers
regret that now! Anonymous, lookalike steel and glass boxes were erected
to replace the Victoriana but these now seem shabby and soul-less. Plans
are afoot to regenerate the city centre but one wonders how can a town
recapture its sense of place?

My temptation is to look back and feel rootless; so I'm glad to have been
reminded of where my true citizenship really lies. Last night in our penultimate
Bible study of the year we looked at the church in Philadelphia (Revelation 3).
They were a church that felt under the cosh but Jesus tells them that they
belong in the New Jerusalem. And that is where my home really is.....that's
not in the past but is a present reality and an eternal future........the place
where Ithaca and Darien meet!



Post Script: 23rd December 06. I should add that the village of Saltaire on the
outskirts of Bradford was recently given the status of "World Heritage Site".
The village was created by a local mill owner called Titus Salt for his workers
back in the 19th Century.
The grid of streets named after Titus Salt's family has become home to the
world's largest Hockney collection and has been joined by other arts, hi-tech
firms and shops. So maybe there is some room for optimism after all!

I.C.R?........"brush & tar!"

December 2006's thought from my agnostic calendar is;

"Although the ICR often emphasizes that it is the
scientific nature of creationist theory which brings
scientists to a belief in a supreme being, it is curious
that they include a requirement for membership (the
inerrancy of the Christian Bible) which effectively
excludes Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and the
majority of Christian sects (who do not accept a literal
reading of all parts of the Bible) from membership. It
is clear that the ICR, which is the most respected of
creationist groups in its attempts to appear scientifically
legitimate, is essentially an organisation composed
solely of Christian Fundamentalists."
Kenneth R Miller, "Scientific Creationism versus Evolution".

Who on earth are the ICR?.............I've never heard of
them!.........And what on earth have their membership
requirements got to do with me?




tagline: Calendar of Doom.