Richard Dawkins is Probably not an Atheist


Here’s a funny story from the Christian Post: “No God” Ads to Hit London Buses. I guess Dick and his friends at the British Humanist Association are raising money (or have already and continue to do so) in order to put advertisements on city buses. Says the article:

The slogan is the brainchild of the British Humanist Association (BHA), an atheist organization that seeks to promote a world without religion where people are “free to live good lives on the basis of reason, experience and shared human values.”Among the campaign’s supporters is well-known atheist activist Richard Dawkins, who promised to match BHA’s goal of raising $9,000 for the ads, according to BBC.

But the group has now raised $59,000 on its own.

“Religion is accustomed to getting a free ride – automatic tax breaks, unearned respect and the right not to be offended, the right to brainwash children,” Dawkins told BBC.

What are they putting on the ads? “There’s Probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” These people are not real atheists; they’re posers. They don’t even have the sack to say: “There is No God.” Wimps. Chickens. Cowards. If they were real atheists they would state up front what they really mean and they would not be ashamed of it. I have now totally lost all respect for Dick and I will henceforth not be purchasing any more of his books.

Notice that the article calls this the ‘brainchild’ of the BHA. So all those ‘Brites’ and this is the best they could come up with? There probably is no God? Seriously? That is absolute genius! Really, these people need to stop embarrassing themselves in public.

Here all this time I thought he was serious. He’s just joking around. On the other hand, one person did get something right:

“This campaign will be a good thing if it gets people to engage with the deepest questions of life,” said the Rev. Jenny Ellis, a Methodist spirituality and discipleship officer.

I don’t know what a spirituality and discipleship officer is, but I think she is right. If such a thing gets people to thinking about whether or not such a statement is true, then this is a good thing. I have a suspicion we’re all going to find out some day anyhow whether we like it or not. We should say thanks to all the fake-atheists for doing some evangelism for us in the meantime.



Technorati Tags, , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

12 thoughts on “Richard Dawkins is Probably not an Atheist

  1. They are scientist, they cannot say “there is no God” because there is no scientific proof of his invalidity thus the “probably”.
    Wasting time writing articles and completley missing the point of the “probably” probably makes you look stupid…

  2. Friends,

    The very fact that one of you felt compelled to explain to me what the word probably means proves to me that you are no brighter than Dicky and his groupies and wannabees. I personally have no scientific proof that Dicky Dawkins is real either, hence the probably. I have never met him. I have heard others say he is real. He has a book with his named attached, but what does that prove? I have done no scientific experiments to prove he is actually real. He could be someone’s imagination.

    I wonder what is a bigger waste of time: My writing the post, or you reading it and explaining to me what I meant?

    I think I know.

  3. We know what you meant. You’re just wrong.

    You do not know what the meaning of the word “atheist” is.

    You do not understand the concept that the question is never, “is X true?”, but always, “how certain is it that X is true?”

    In short, when it comes to philosophy, you’re too ignorant to be writing about it to anyone.

  4. Lucy,

    You stopped by, didn’t you? And just so you know, the only reason I wrote about Dick Dawkins is so that you would stop by and I could let you know that God’s grace is available to all who ask. He spared not his own Son, but gave him up for us all.


    My logic is no worse than yours. I stated exactly the same thing. If Dicky is only probably certain that there is no God then he is only, and can only be, probably certain that he himself is an atheist. You can’t have it both ways my friend. You cannot absolutely be an atheist when you are not absolutely certain there is no God.

    Nevertheless, Christ died for your sins too. And if you are willing to call on his Name, he is willing to forgive you and save you.


  5. Anon,

    There is nothing baseless about my claim at all. “The cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but those being saved it is the power of God.”

    Of course you think it is ‘whatever.’ Taste and see that the Lord is good.


  6. Nice post. Perhaps the “probably” was very intentional since just a few days later Dawkins said in a debate with John Lennox at Oxford , “A serious case could be made for a deistic God.” He doesn’t sound like a real atheist at all.

  7. Everyone’s attacking the “probably” clause…which is quite funny, because both sides are incorrect (though it is very interesting watching them project preloaded meaning into the predication of a single word).

    ***They had to say “probably” because otherwise the ad agency could not run the ad:

    [Edit: I don’t permit links in comments. It’s nothing personal.–jerry]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s