Feed The Judge

Apparently it’s better than arguing with him.  Or to him.

Ignorant

Richard Dawkins, world famous atheist and evolution devotee, showing that he simply doesn’t know what he is talking about:

If there were a God that met you after death, what would you say?
If I met God, in the unlikely event, after I died? The first thing I would say is, well, which one are you? Are you Zeus? Are you Thor? Are you Baal? Are you Mithras? Are you Yahweh? Which God are you, and why did you take such great pains to conceal yourself and to hide away from us?

 

Emphasis supplied.

One does not need to be religious at all to know that there is a very simple answer to that question.  One need only be reasonably educated and familiar with the ideas of Parmenides and Plato, and the history of western thought generally.

God, according to this tradition, doesn’t take great pains to conceal himself.  He is “concealed” because the perfect cannot have contact with the imperfect.  This is the central empirical problem that almost every religion addresses in one way or another.  It is impossible to understand any religion at all, and especially Christianity, without appreciating this problem.  Beyond that, it is a problem so well known and recognized that ignorance of it from a “scholar” who purports to be an intellectual antagonist of religion is quite staggering.

Dawkins’ intelligence, if any, would have the depth of a soap dish.