A Response to Richard Dawkins

This past Friday, on the Opinion Exchange page of the Minneapolis "Star-Tribune," there appeared an editorial, written by Richard Dawkins and titled "View on evolution say a lot about a candidate", that literally caused my blood-pressure to rise to dangerous levels. What grabbed my attention was the sub-headline which read: "Evolution is a fact, as securely established as any in science. Those who deny it are likely ignorant in other fields as well." I trust that your blood is beginning to get a little warmer just reading those two statements.

Richard Dawkins is an atheist and avowed evolutionist. In his most recent book, titled, "The God Delusion", he basically states that God does not exist and has never existed. To adapt from the teachings of Karl Marx, religion - for Dawkins and others of his ilk, that would mean any worldview that even fosters some concept of a god - is merely an opiate (or a crutch) for the people.

Dawkins began his editorial - originally published by the "Washington Post" - by focusing upon Texas governor and Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Perry who has championed the cause for the teaching of both creationism and evolution within the Texas school systems. Listen to what Dawkins thinks of Governor Perry: "...There is nothing unusual about Perry. Uneducated fools can be found in every country and every period of history, and they are not unknown in high office. What is unusual about today's Republican Party is this: In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today's Republican Party 'in spite of' is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory." Now are you getting a little fired-up? Let me rephrase what Dawkins has said just in case you missed it: If you are a Republican and you do not accept the evolutionary theory, then you must be some type of ignorant, red-necked, back-woods, uneducated fool; you certainly have no hope of advancing in the world where real knowledge is maintained."

Friends, that was just the first column of the five column editorial. Ready for column two? Now Dawkins begins his thrust against creationism and his defense of evolution. "Evolution is a fact, as securely established as any in science, and he who denies it betrays woeful ignorance and lack of education, which likely extends to other fields as well." Stop here! Because I don't accept evolution, according to Dawkins, then I will probably be ignorant and lacking educational foundations for business, for literature, for politics, for medicine - for that matter, any other field of learning. Wow! I do feel ignorant in some fields - electronics, for example - but I didn't realize I was that far off base in other areas. I wished someone had told me this a long time ago - it would have spared me some headaches along the way.

Dawkins then continues, "Evolution is the stunningly simple but elegant explanation of our very existence and the existence of every living creature on the planet. Thanks to Darwin, we now understand why we are here and why we are the way we are. You cannot be ignorant of evolution and be a cultivated and adequate citizen of today." Feeling good about yourself about now? Or is your blood-pressure beginning to rise?

"Darwin's idea is arguably the most powerful ever to occur to a human mind. ... A theory that assumes most of what it is trying to explain is a bad theory. That is why the creationist or 'intelligent design' theory is such a rotten theory." Hold the fort! Has Dawkins forgotten all the "missing links" in his "scientific fact of evolution?" Since Darwin first published his book in the mid-part of the 19th century not one single "missing link" has been found. Friends, that is a fact. And yet those "missing links" are the foundation for the supposed incontrovertible fact of evolution? It seems to me, that by Dawkins's definition, evolution is a bad theory.

Dawkins then seeks to help us to understand the complexity of the body of a bird - and he does a great job of defining its complexity. He then states, "The whole machine is immensely improbable in the sense that, if you randomly shook up the parts over and over again, never in a million years would they fall into the right shape." And you know, he is right. But here is where Dawkins misses the point. What if there was a Master Designer who actually made that little bird? Could He not once again assemble those millions of parts to create another bird? Friends, is that not what God does with each new birth. Last Saturday we attended the Minnesota State Fair. One of the buildings we stopped at was the "Birthing Barn." What a crowd was there! And what were we observing?- the miracle of birth - of chickens, turkeys, calves, lambs, and piglets. I was reminded of those powerful words of David in Psalm 139, speaking of his own creation in his mother's womb: "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made..." (Psalm 139:13-14).

Finally Dawkins states, "The rival theory to explain the functional complexity of life - creationism - is about as bad a theory as has ever been proposed. It is such a bad theory it doesn't deserve to be called one at all, and it certainly doesn't deserve to be taught alongside evolution in science classes." Did you hear what he was saying? Creationism is only worthy of being tossed into the trash. Throw God into the dumpster, if you will. Through Darwin we have figured out this thing we call life. Frankly, friends, I don't want to be standing any where near Richard Dawkins on Judgment Day. If you and I are angry - at least I know I am angry - can you imagine what God is feeling when He knows this man's heart?

Let me share one more quote from this long editorial: "To die in ignorance of its (evolution) elegance, and power to explain our own existence, is a tragic loss, comparable to dying without ever having experienced great music, great literature or a beautiful sunset." My response to Richard Dawkins is this: "Richard, you are the one who has lost. You have gone through life and never known what great music really is. You have experienced life and have never known the real beauty of the world around you. You have been the greater loser because you have failed to know the great and awesome God behind everything you see. Richard, in your eyes I may be one of the greatest ignoramuses that ever lived, but a day is coming when you will realize how ignorant you have truly been. Only then, Richard, it will be too late to make any changes."