Dawkins Rebukes Cameron, Calling Bible 'An Appalling Moral Compass'

The Huffington Post UK  
First Posted: 17/12/2011 14:18 GMT Updated: 19/12/2011 18:13 GMT

Richard Dawkins has challenged David Cameron’s assertion that the UK needs to return to Christian ideals, calling the Bible “an appalling moral compass”.

On Friday, in a speech to celebrate the 400th birthday of the King James Bible, the prime minister said the New Testament had helped give our country "a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today,” adding that we should "actively stand up and defend" these Christian values.

However, speaking to Sky News, Dawkins, a renowned, scientist, author and atheist, said that Cameron is wrong to suggest the Christian Bible is going to “help us with our morals and our social wellbeing.”

“The Christian bible will help us with our literature,” said the author of The God Delusion. “It should therefore be taught in schools in literature classes, but it’s not going to help us with our morals, far from it.”

“The bible is a terrible moral compass, if you think about it. Of course, you can cherry pick the verses that you like, which means the verses that happen to coincide with our modern secular consensus, but then you need to have a rationale for leaving out the ones that say stone people to death if they break the Sabbath, or if they commit adultery. It’s an appalling moral compass.”

The Oxford professor reasoned that the ideas within the new testament - of crucifixion, of redemption, of a scapegoat who is put to death for the sins of all mankind – makes it a terrible social guide. “The sooner we leave Christianity and all other religions behind, from a moral point of view the better,” he said.

In an open letter to Cameron in the December edition of the New Statesmen, Dawkins questioned the prime minister's faith and that of most politicians.

"If you are like several government ministers - of all three parties - to whom I have spoken, you are not really a religious believer yourself," he wrote. "Several ministers and ex-ministers of education whom I have met, both Conservative and Labour, don't believe in God but, to quote the philosopher Daniel Dennett, they do "believe in belief".

Speaking on Saturday, Dawkins continued on the offensive, charging Cameron with falling into a trap by calling the UK a Christian country, but concluding that it is in a "terrible moral state".

"It seems like a paradox," he quipped. "If we are in a state of moral collapse, I don’t think Christianity or Islam is going to help. What we need is a better moral sense, which we get from moral philosophy. It’s absolute nonsense to say we need faith in order to be good.”

On Friday, Professor Dawkins' fellow atheist campaigner Christopher Hitchens died aged 62, following a battle with cancer. Along with Dennett and neuroscientist Sam Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins became known as The Four Horsemen of the Anti-Apocalypse, a group of atheist thinkers and writers offering, as Hitchens put it, "a push back to religious tyranny".

Watch The Four Horsemen in a roundtable discussion on religion, filmed in 2007.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,426
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (17 total)
07:33 PM on 05/04/2012
The high handed pseudo-intellectualist arrogance and snobbery shown by some of those here who think themselves so superior to anyone else, makes them no better than those they complain about with little understanding about British politics and the use of 'spin'.

Cameron has used that idea in trying to gain popularity NOT because he himself would follow much as written in the Bible (esp. The New Testament) because if he did, we would not have the situation where the poor are being marginalized, education and health being run down to the ground etc. Dawkins himself is no better than Cameron, or any of the 'bible thumping religionists'.

Dawkins himself is a most arrogant, outspoken, self promoting git in my humble opinion. I think he's more interested in starting his own cult of pseudo-intellectualism, as well as making a packet from it, than from any 'rational' argument about religion and faith in general that he purports to lord over us 'ignorant Deists/Theists'.

I will even go as far to say that he is actually a bigot of the worst order, using his 'superior knowledge' as an argument for what is basically his deep prejudice against Christians and any other persons of faith in general. He is no better than the Ayatollah Khomeini, or the worst right wing 'fundie christian/religionist' to come out of anywhere else, who would abuse the point and use a similar argument to push their agendas in a similar vein.
06:50 PM on 05/03/2012
We shoud all be praying for Dawkins' soul for he has since he lives yet the opportunity to read & learn whereof he speaks. He is bitter but I wonder if has met Joni and others, wonderful Christians. Suggest for self learning: www.e-sword.net, www.answersingenesis.org, www.creationmoments.com, www.gospelofchrist.com, www.houetohouse for heart to heart, www.gospeladvocate.com, www.apologeticspress.org, www.intelligentdesign.org, www.bbnradio.org to find a local radio station although many denominations are represented & therefore some errors when compared to the inspired written words of God's Bible. Any Church of Christ will gladly aide in instruction/learning. I do understand but for a better life and better spirit please consider giving it a try. God Bless you and yours.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Filthy
05:54 PM on 01/04/2012
Look, even Christians know that the paradigm they propagate is likely untrue, that's why they look both ways before crossing the street. If there was an instantaneous and infinite lifetime of bliss waiting for me on the flip-side of any horrible traffic accident, would I ever put on my seat belt?

And if allowing my children to reach the age of accountability meant that they risked eternal fiery torment would I not have a moral and ethical imperative to kill them before they became teenagers? Of course. And I wouldn't be concerned about the consequences to my own soul. If I believed the threat was real. But Christians don't actually believe that their paradigm is real - Christianity is about TRYING to believe that the paradigm is real. The only unforgivable sin in Christianity is coming to terms with your own lack of belief. It make strike some as an oversimplification of a rather complex theology, but so long as you're vehemently trying to stifle your doubt that what you've been taught is bunk, then you're satisfying your minimum obligations.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AuldLochinvar
08:20 PM on 01/06/2012
Good points.
My own favorite is the millions of people who prayed that poor sick old Pope John-Paul II would continue not to go to his heavenly reward.
06:56 PM on 05/03/2012
Are you sure you know what they prayed for? I pray for the sick and dying but for their comfort, peace, in the arms of loved ones and read the Bible to them taking their minds
off themselves providing relief. If you read and learn you will change your tune as will others. You just do not know what you are talking about. Sorry. God bless you and yours.
07:07 PM on 05/03/2012
Hzve you read God's inspired written word, The Bible? Did you aks questions www.christiancourier.com? Many attend church & do not understand because they have not attempted to really study & learn what is being said & understand the message. Jesus encourages learning, having knowledge with which to make a good & reasonable decision. Many leaned bits and pieces of twisted sayings at their parents & grandparents knees & think they have knowledge, but in reality they have a lot of miss-information. Jesus clearly states each one is responsible for theirself & it does take time to learn. Church of Christ will help going as fast as desired. www.e-sword.net, www.creationmoments.com, www.answersingenesis.org, www.intelligentdesign.org, www.apologeticspress.org, www.thegospelofchrist.com, www.housetohouse.com for heart to heart, www.wbschool.org, www.bbnradio.org for a local radio station. Know what U are talking about. God Bless you and yours.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Filthy
08:04 PM on 05/03/2012
Yes I have read the bible. If you need any help in understanding what it says and why, or putting anything in historical context I'd be happy to help you.
04:33 PM on 12/26/2011
Dawkins is beginning to give Atheists a bad name. He spends all his time campaigning against religion that he's beginning to treat Atheism as a religion of itself. I am an atheist, but wish there was life after death; I just realise that, unfortunately, that's impossible. Dawkins, leave people to make their own mistakes and concentrate on what you're good at, rather than boring the populace with your tedious rants. Not only is it boring to most, but it's insulting to those who do, in fact, believe that there is a superior being. A shame there isn't, but hardly worth moaning about others' belief systems because of it.
06:04 PM on 12/26/2011
What is missing from Dawkin's rhetoric is that as an eminent scientist himself he should know better than most that the more answers we get about the universe, the more questions arise. As for 'life after death' it is either impossible or not - we have no way of knowing and never will. As far as any of the organised religions go, they have no idea either.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:05 PM on 12/27/2011
Figurewizard,

Questions of a metaphysics, for example, "Is there a God", "Is there an afterlife" are simply addressed by asking whether the underlying assumptions are justified, specifically is there a rational basis? If lacking, they are empty statements void of real meaning, and thus, credibility. Paradoxically, irrationalism is the basis of major religions and the crux of Dawkins’s criticisms.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:49 AM on 12/27/2011
I was going to recommend a few of Dawkin's books but I think you would struggle.
10:15 AM on 12/27/2011
I believe you have no idea what anyone will or will not understand. Your superior attitude is not pleasant to read and only serves to make you seem foolish. His name is Dawkins, not Dawkin, by the way. It says it on all of his books.....even the ones I own.
05:53 AM on 12/28/2011
How about The Blind Watchmaker? Sums Dawkins up to perfection, total blindness to cell 'intelligence' without which any form of mental intelligence would be impossible.
http://new­s.bbc.co.u­k/1/hi/sci­/tech/9447­90.stm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Rainwater
Expat in Thailand
04:31 AM on 12/25/2011
Sounds like Cameron has been watching too much American Republican politics and Fox "News."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jessjesskk
Benevolent Zombie Power
08:53 AM on 12/23/2011
richard: fully agree.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Compassionnotreligion
Be awed & humbled by nature & empathy -not Juju.
05:50 PM on 12/22/2011
To quote Epicurus (circa 300 BCE)

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

Now please, if any religionist going to even reply:

a/ please do so in your own words (no regurgitations from the bible etc. as saying the bible/koran/whatever is true because it says so in the bible/koran/whatever is only like Delusions-R-Us Inc. claiming their delusions are true, ... because it says so in their adverts)

b/ please give a REASONED argument.

Please. Pretty-please?
05:39 AM on 12/23/2011
Do you ask a slug to fly? Then why ask the religionists to use reason? It's an unreasonable request, since by definition, their being believers means that logic and reason are beyond them.

LOVE the Epicurus quote!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Compassionnotreligion
Be awed & humbled by nature & empathy -not Juju.
09:20 AM on 12/23/2011
Yes, you're quite right I know. I just live in the hope that one day a religionist might actually TRY to answer something like this, because in doing so it might just make them think.

No takers though - what a shame!
05:22 AM on 12/28/2011
Would be more or less like asking a single celled organism to solve a puzzle I suppose.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/944790.stm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nabil Muhammad
12:08 PM on 12/23/2011
Right, sorry, happened to see that your "rule" is a bit off. because those aren't your words they are, as you say, Epicurus', then why did you proscribe those who wish to reply to it from doing the same? You impose upon them Epicurus' words yet refuse to have them impose upon you their quotes?

First you need to offer YOUR "reasoned argument" not Epicurus', then you can ask others to do the same.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Compassionnotreligion
Be awed & humbled by nature & empathy -not Juju.
04:59 PM on 12/23/2011
LOL, I was just waiting for that one. Do you REALLY not see the difference, or do you just not want to?

Ok, here's a clue ... one is a question, that doesn't offer a CIRCULAR argument as to it's validity. The reason I quoted it was a/ it's succintly written (but virtually ANY atheist could put that question in their own words!) ) b/ it was written BCE i.e. certainly before Christianity told hold.

Right - over to you then...
11:54 PM on 12/21/2011
What astounds me about Dawkins his his arrogance. "The God Delusion" is a case in point. The message is that if you dare to believe in God you are a deluded fool. Dawkins is a clever man and a superb scientist...yet so is John Polkinghorne and so is Robert Winston. Yet they both believe in God as well as being great scientists. Dawkins polarises and antagonises people - I wonder how many people actually listen to what he says on religion these days because of his combative and arrogant tone?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:03 AM on 12/22/2011
He doesn't strike me as anywhere near as antagonistic as the Bible thumpers that we have here in the states. If you want to talk about combative and arrogant, well they are the poster children for that. They will flat out tell you that you are damned and shall burn in hell for all eternity if you don't believe as they, and once they get a toehold in your politics, well look out. They will then attempt to legislate their "values" upon you, whether they happen to be yours or not.

Christianity in general is probably as divisive an invention that has ever been.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:43 PM on 12/22/2011
well said.
Whether people "believe" in a particular form of rhetoric about God or not, I doubt God is offended, taking offense is really only something an ego can do.
If someone is peace loving, kind, and treats others as they wish to be treated, then they are with God whether they cloud the issue with rhetoric or not.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:29 PM on 12/23/2011
Yes, but have read Polkinghorne's reconciliation of the irreconcilable? Truly bizarre.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
03:48 PM on 12/21/2011
At the time of writing this there are 1,264 posts on this thread.

Not one of them asserts that the Bible can be simply read and followed word for word.

Even people who support the overall message of the Bible, or the message of the New Testament still say you have to 'interpret' it or 'read it in context' or 'take into account the inaccuracies of translation' etc, etc.

How is that a good moral compass? If you were all-powerful, and you wanted the population of a whole planet to have an equal chance of understanding your words, wouldn't you have made them more clear?
06:26 AM on 12/22/2011
There is no "overall message of the Bible," but apart from that, you're right.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:35 PM on 12/22/2011
good point. I guess that is why intuition is meant to be a living, present compass in the form of common sense. There may be inspiration in parts of the Bible, but to take it literally, word for word, as exactly what God said, produces a kind of religious insanity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
06:14 PM on 12/22/2011
"It's usually wise, when promulgating eternal laws, to be clear about what you mean."
CH
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:22 PM on 12/21/2011
The Bible in and of itself is not appalling, but I agree the way people interpret it certainly is. Unfortunately ignorant look for archaic Bible statements to rationalize their petty hatreds and selfish agendas, then hide behind 'the word of God.' The Bible is peppered with truth, but riddled with human fallibility in terms of translation. Literal translations don't take into account all the archaic languages that it has been translated from, archaic greek, and Latin, by Power Mongers of the roman empire. The notion that in the after life non-believers will burn for eternal torture is an insane belief, and it makes God not only a terrorist to hold that over peoples' head, but a sadist as well. People who believe that literally tend to be very condemning of others s a coping mechanism: "it is not me who will burn, but you." Finger waggers are not Christ-like. The Michele Bachman variety of Christianity snarls down on humanity from a high horse, unfortunately, this has become the popular version of modern day Christianity. It is too bad they give God a bad name and actually promote athiesm as people are very turned off by the hyppocricy.
11:40 AM on 12/21/2011
the criminals are clearly in charge of the establishment, the financial industry and the global media as well as everything. Well the people have had enough of our enslavement. the truth is coming out. this is the peoples country and next year we are taking it back. Cameron and co are commiting crimes against humanity and there day of judgement is coming soon. Why dont you think about redeeming yourselves with starting to do things for the people as appose to your global domination and enslavement of humanity agenda
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
11:10 AM on 12/21/2011
I think the Office for Budget Responsibilty should look into the government's spending on faith schools. If it can't be proven that God exists, then public funding should be withdrawn.

It's the same simple test that's required of every other public service and tax expense.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mbrahms26
02:29 PM on 12/20/2011
Three cheers for Dawkins!
09:50 PM on 12/20/2011
I take it not much support then for a guy that thinks just by calling David Cameron & God the publicity will sell more of my books
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
10:57 AM on 12/21/2011
Dawkins is an exceptionally clever man.

If his primary motivation was earning more money by selling books, then he could easily write the sort of best-seller that would sell even more copies than his books on science and atheism.

Instead what he's working hard at doing is encouraging people to learn about truth by asking important questions.

This is one of the reasons why so many people admire and respect him.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
11:05 AM on 12/21/2011
Would Mr Dawkins be more correct in his opinions if he was poor?
02:12 PM on 12/20/2011
"Over 95% of all Bible facts have already been proven so when you meet your maker, & you will I hope i'm there to see the look on your face when you do. "

Mods: this is a lie. Why do you not remove the post?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mbrahms26
02:34 PM on 12/20/2011
They removed my post pointingout that the Bible endorses slavery, genocide and oppression of women for violating "guidelines". Never mind that it is true. Meanwhile, slurs gainst atheists and lies about the "trut" of the Bible are left in. Apparently, religion is a sacred cow in the UK as well as the USA.
10:37 PM on 12/20/2011
maybe because you speak rubbish! isnt it great when any fool can make somthing up and blame it on religion
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:37 PM on 12/23/2011
Despite what Cameron says, religion in the UK is virtually ignored. However, I think the the point is that religion is sacred to AOL.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Philip J Sparrow
When your work speaks for itself, keep quiet
02:09 PM on 12/20/2011
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell"

- CS Lewis, Christian apologetic
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gerald Brogdon
03:06 PM on 12/20/2011
This quote is taken out of context because it misses the key point of C.S. Lewis' argument that Jesus was who He said He was. CS Lewis said that Jesus was either liar, lunatic or who He said He was (Son of God). The phrase at the beginning of the quote is the condition (A man who was merely a man). Although I can't see the comment that caused this response, it is important to add the rest of the thought so it would not be taken out of context.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidEm
04:27 PM on 12/20/2011
And it's such flawed logic anyway, as it presupposes biblical literalism---i.e., that we have exact quotes, just because they got included in the collection of documents known as the New Testament, of what Jesus said.
He sure seems to be a man in some texts, and a God-walking-around-on-earth in others.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Philip J Sparrow
When your work speaks for itself, keep quiet
05:10 PM on 12/20/2011
It's Lewis attempting to set up false trilemma which backfires on him. He assumed that no one would consider Jesus to be a liar or a madman so they would have to conclude that he was in some way divine; but he offers no proof of any such divinity whereas 'liar' seems quite plausible.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nabil Muhammad
12:16 PM on 12/23/2011
in Lewis' context its talking about how Jesus is the son of God (as in "begotten not made" kind). But, how is "the Son of God" the direct opposite of "Liar or Lunatic" do you not think there are many other degrees between the two?