What’s important here is not what Richard Dawkins likes or dislikes, but the fact that people call him a “racist” with a straight face for thinking “Allahu akbar” sounds aggressive, and preferring the sound of cathedral bells. What race is Islam again? What race is the jihad murder of innocent civilians? I never can remember.
And “Allahu akbar” is aggressive. It is meant to be. “Allahu akbar” means Allah is greater, i.e., greater than your god. It’s a declaration of superiority. Jihad mass murderers the world over scream “Allahu akbar” as they murder people. 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta reminded himself to “shout, ‘Allahu Akbar,’ because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers.” I guess he was an anti-Muslim racist, too.
“‘Tedious old racist’: Richard Dawkins under fire for dismissing ‘aggressive’ Muslim prayer,” RT, July 17, 2018:
Best-selling atheist author Richard Dawkins has once again been branded “racist” after he tweeted that the sound of cathedral bells is much more pleasant than the “aggressive-sounding Muslim Allahu Akbar.”
The Arabic phrase – which means ‘God is Greatest’ – is used by Muslims, usually to express gratitude and commitment to Allah, and it’s sung at the beginning of the call to prayer. It also has negative connotations as a number of terrorists have shouted the words before carrying out attacks.
Dawkins, who has previously faced a barrage of criticism for claiming in a 2013 tweet that Islam is the “greatest force for evil in the world today,” was again accused of Islamophobia on Tuesday morning after sending a provocative tweet.
High-profile communist reporter Ash Sarkar blasted the atheist author of ‘The God Delusion’ as a “tedious old racist.” Meanwhile, other Twitter users said that rather than Dawkins being influenced by what he branded his “cultural upbringing,” he was instead mired by “prejudice.”
Last year Dawkins was barred from attending an event hosted by KPFA Radio in Berkeley, California, because of his “abusive speech against Islam.” But in an open letter to the organizers, the writer insisted he “never used abusive speech against Islam” and was instead targeting ‘Islamism,’ a fundamentalist interpretation of the religion.
Dawkins also made the headlines in 2015 when he questioned the motives of Ahmed Mohamed, a 14-year-old boy who was wrongly arrested in the US after his teacher thought a clock he made was a bomb, and back in 2013 drew fire for comparing Islam and Nazi Germany….
Mac-101 says
So is he holdin his ground or will he cave?
GP says
This man appears to seek out truth so I believe that he will find the TRUTH before he leaves this earth.
Mac-101 says
And hopefully will guide others to it before he meets his Maker!
blitz2b says
Sure… If renowned former atheist scholar Anthony Flew finally abandoned his atheism at the end of his life, we could expect Dawkins to do the same once he is honest about the origins argument that he struggles so much with to explain…
That would be a miracle…
gravenimage says
Atheist Anti-Jihadist Christopher Hitchens did not change his views.
blitz2b says
graven image,
Most militant atheists are simply angry with a God that they so vehemently deny exists.
Apparently Dawkins was molested as a kid by a clergyman, that could be his reason to be angry with God who ” let it happen”.
It would therefore be easier to deny the existence of a God than to explain away why he did nothing to prevent it.
The problem of evil however is not just an issue that stumps theists, even atheists grapple with this problem.
gravenimage says
blitz2b, I’m just glad to see Dawkins standing up against the threat of Islam.
gravenimage says
Dawkins has been pretty solidly Anti-Jihad. He is a brave man.
Mac-101 says
Yes he is. May G-d bless and protect him.
blitz2b says
@Mac-101… Which god? The one that does not exist or the OT Biblical one that Dawkins thoroughly despises?
gordon miller says
What a momentous news item!
Caro K. says
Mac, trying to hold his ground but gives Islam a pass by calling the villain “Islamism.” You and I know that means Islam.
Mac-101 says
If he doesn’t have armed security can’t blame him.
gravenimage says
This is still a lot closer to the truth than many people get.
Baucent says
And many cowed Britains will silently agree with him. That’s progress of some sort.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Baucent.
J D S says
Muslim can scream allahu ackbar till the cows come home but that will never make their god greater than my God….because my God does not condone …MURDER. RAPE, THIEVERY, SLAVERY and on and on it goes with the atrocious acts approved by their god…..
The problem is…ALL these atrocious acts are not seen as illegal to Muslim Islamist because they are sanctioned by their god….Now is their god real?…sure he is..but his realm is the underworld…..
Pearl says
Their “god” is Satan. And, no, he’s not greater than God.
esther says
abusive language about islam? Muslim children are subjected to abusive
language about Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism —–and any
non islam ism in existence. Its IN THEIR HEADS—–they should be banned
universally
Kufar1 says
Dear Professor Dawkins,
Islamists invite famous people to join their cult of Islam. I would like to invite you to Christianity.
You will suffer by the loss of reputation among your peers and monetary gains.
After converting, your faith is your own private domain.
With hope and love, your brother in Christ.
Light_n_Fluffy says
All you have to do to convince us to ‘convert’ is to get your god down here so we can do lunch. I believe his PA is a guy called Gabriel. What’s his phone number?
CogitoErgoSum says
Some think He’s already been here and He invites us to supper (or lunch) with Him every day. You don’t really need a phone to talk to Him; just thinking about Him works fine. Some say He’s just a fantasy figure but what He taught and what He brought to the world is real. Many don’t like what He had to say but I see nothing wrong with it and it works fine for me. You can take it or you can leave it. It’s all up to you …. and that’s how it was meant to be from the beginning.
elee says
Islam means to destroy all our (“fine”) arts—-music, painting, sculpture, you name it. I’ve got a problem with this, Sign me on as a racist too. Oh and BTW it isn’t just “white” peoples’ art they mean to destroy. Remember Timbuktu? The Buddhas of Afghanistan? Yep, we’re racists. Anybody want to talk about the history of enslavement of Africans? Yep, we’re racists all right.
gravenimage says
+1
Wellington says
+2
Sylvia says
Books. They will destroy all the books. Music and all musical instruments. Dogs are haram and would be banned I imagine. Sports are a pagan activity, best ban that as well. No art no sculptures. Well the sculptures are already being remedied by SJW’s. Gambling and games of chance, alcohol. Pretty well anything you enjoy now. Kiss it goodbye.
gravenimage says
+1
Westman says
I expect, any day, to hear that Muslims ransacked the Lourve.
They will get my piano, doublebass, guitar, and jazz recordings when they pry them from my cold dead fingers.
If they put a prayer tower anywhere near my home the response will be highly-amplified John Coltrane, Wayne Shorter, and Indian ragas.
Aardvark says
Try the Beatles ‘Piggies’, too. That should go down well.
Giacomo Latta says
Excellent idea.
gravenimage says
+1
Hogdude says
…and the worst, IMO; freedom to think.
Westman says
+3
IanB says
+me They will have to prise my trombone from my cold, dead hands.
jayell says
The sound of a bell results from some level of skilled craftsmanship and, in the case of church bells, is carefully crafted to give some kind of musical pleasure. There is no overt message or any kind of intellectual content in the anonymous sound of a bell and any significance it might have lies only in the mind of the hearer. Therefore a bell can make no imposition on anyone – unless they’re trying to get to sleep at 3 a.m. and the village clock is trying to be informative! On the other hand the Call to Prayer is unadulterated religious/political propaganda aimed at controlling the masses and is not performed to be aesthetically pleasing. Not pleasant listening at the best of times, and a deliberate gross imposition.
elee says
Euphony is preferable to cacophony, regardless of the cacophonist’s ethnicity.
Cicero says
Fabulous ! What a clever comment !
gravenimage says
Hear, hear!
R Russell says
Richard Dawkins has led many youngsters astray. He has used science to pretend there was fact, not interpretation to promote atheism. Because he now knows, that evolution is impossible he has now said he believes we came from outer space. That of course only puts the problem one step backwards.
Sadly at present he still needs the forgiveness of YHWH and his time is getting short.
I have seem small softenings in him in recent times. May he allow himself to be humble and accept he has made a lifetime of mistakes about the Creator who loves him.
Yes, bells are sweeter to the ear than the guttural allahu akbar, but what is much sweeter is the knowledge of forgiven sin and the friendship with the person known as Jesus (YHWH the son) . He doesn’t have much time left. I hope he uses it wisely. His eternal destiny depends on it.
Naildriver says
Would that be in your mind a bossy, jealous god? A vengeful, wrathful god? Something like Mohammed had in mind to grovel to?
Or Jesus, who’d advise one to forgive? Or rather His advice to love thy neighbor?
The problem with those who bandy about their personal relationship with god or Jesus is too often they ring fence Him with the OT, or their own absurd and childish or idiotic concepts, while daring anyone to question it — never bothering to realize that’s no better than what Islamic fanatics believe.
Dawkins has provided a lot more to humanity than a stadium full of preachers — who, given the number of those seeking interfaith dialogue, I suspect most would choose Islam’s rule to a secular state — just so they could burn ‘witches'(like Dawkins) again.
Contributions which ease human suffering, and provide insight into why we shouldn’t blame the accidental or random events in the world as some imaginary personal god poking a stick upon us, like some child with a jar of ants — I think, is in accord with how Jesus would have had it.
Dawkins’s atheism doesn’t matter. What matters is he does see the threat Islam poses, and how its rise enables the worst traits in men.
Ric says
Agreed, Dawkins is entitled to his opinion; I’m sure the Overlords are in a bind, likely, wanting to charge him for a supposed Islamophobic slur; however, I’m sure the prosecutors, the Crown, would have their hands full. Dawkins fame or infamy would cause a lot of negative publicity about the government’s quashing non-Muslim citizens’ freedom of speech. Dawkins, after all, is not Tommy Robinson.
R Russell says
Naildriver.
I see no point in answering you because of your attitude. You do not realise that YHWH reveals himself as Father son and Holy Spirit, is a God of Love righteousness and justice.
You have quoted out of context to make your point.
The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob can be known. The choice is yours.
Naildriver says
I say perhaps incorrectly ‘no better than what Muslim fanatics believe, in that what you threaten Dawkins and others here, with — a ‘lake of fire’? Eternal damnation in some Dark Age vision from Bosch I’d assume; but just off the charts from the usual Western rational mind.
What is this weird need you have to try and scare others into believing your cherry picking of the most dismal, and likely untrue or unnecessary aspects of Christianity? Do you at least have virgins or boys where you’ll demand your god YHWH to send you, or does an eternity of being a choir music leader really get you going? Because I doubt you’ll be happy in heaven unless you scare people.
Still, Dawkins is correct to see your beliefs are OK by him compared to Islam! Carry on!
R Russell says
Naildriver.
You are fixated on information from your own mind, not from what I posted.
I have told you that people decide their own destiny. You have chosen to disregard that and go off at a tangent of your own choosing. You have chosen to believe a lot of fantasy. YHWH God is a God of love.
Carolyne says
I too, am an Atheist and I think that the tenets of Christianity are far superior to those of bloodthirsty Islam.
However, I am mystified as to why anyone thinks their God abhors vowels being used in spelling his name. Sorry to say but that’s rather silly.
Naildriver says
it is interesting too that the Arabic of the early Koran lacked certain vowels that led to confusing passages and their meanings — at least so I have been told.
Yes, the lack of vowels is annoying — and silly. My choice!
Wellington says
R Russell: When did Dawkins assert that evolution was impossible? Details please.
For the record, the evidence for evolution is so massive that to deny it is akin to denying that the earth revolves around the sun. Besides, if God exists, evolution only demonstrates the extraordinary complexity and subtlety of the deity. Methinks you do not know of Thomas Aquinas’ warning, i.e., that the Bible was not meant to be a scientific treatise—and Aquinas lived in the 13th century.
Wara Wazaq says
But …but …but the earth is flat and the sun sets in a muddy pool.
The Koran says so.
R Russell says
What you call evidence I call interpretation.
As for your postulate that the complexity of evolution reveals the magnitude of YHWH, it doesn’t fit in with his revealed Word. He created the world perfect and the decision of our first parents to trust Satan instead of YHWH caused death to become part of the equation. Our first parents were meant to be immortal. They died spiritually when they chose the wrong path. They died physical many years later. Weeds and thorns were also part of the result of their decision to trust Satan.
This is totally different from evolution which has millions of years of death and disease with weeds and thorns as part of it.
Your red herrings about Thomas Aquinas and the earth and sun are exactly that.They are subjects you raised.
The Bible isn’t a science book as you know, but all the science within it is accurate.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Scientific-Proof-of-Bible.php
Nachmanides in the 13th century used ch 1 of Genesis to discover 10 dimensions – 4 knowable and 6 unknowable. Something science has only relatively recently discovered.
The New Testament speaks of 4 dimensions when only 3 were known.
I should have been a little more accurate. Biogenesis was what I meant.
Wellington says
Uh, R Russell, thanks for your response but when exactly, per your words, did Dawkins conclude evolution is impossible? You didn’t answer this. In fact, you skirted it.
As for a reference to Thomas Aquinas, per what I made, being nothing but a red herring, ditto for the earth revolving around the sun, you made a non-answer, not an answer.
Look, Christianity may be the true religion. For that matter, Islam may be (something help us all if this is the case), but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and religions of all kinds produce extraordinary claims in bunches but NEVER produce extraordinary evidence. For instance, there is no extraordinary evidence that Mohammed is the last and greatest of the prophets. Neither is there extraordinary evidence that Jesus rose from the dead (until the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., called by the Emperor Constantine, there were many Christians, for instance the Gnostic Christians, that believed Jesus’s “resurrection” was a symbolic and spiritual one, not a literal one, but they were ‘eliminated” after a political decision was made by Constantine and clerics who endorsed the “literal interpretation” and all this adds up to NO extraordinary evidence). Go from here. That is if you are able.
Keys says
R Russell –
I am trying to understand why you think evolutionary theory must conflict with Christian belief. ( My guess is it conflicts with Islamic beliefs. )
Do you understand the account(s) of creation in Genisis to be literally true ? Do you believe God created all he created in 7 twenty-four hour days ? Just wondering “yes” or “no” – not interested in why you think that.
I have looked all over the place and can not find any evidence that Dawkins completely changed his mind on evolution, especially that he now “believes we came from outer space” !
R Russell says
Wellington.
Dawkins is well documented in saying life originated in outer space – to which he adds ‘evolution’ as an after thought.
You have a lot of confusion in what you post.
I believe the Bible – never proven wrong. I gave some of that evidence in the link I provided. It is your choice as to whether you wish to explore it farther. I also did comment on Aquinas at the same time and I introduced Nachmanides, and what he discovered in Genesis ch 1 but you have ignored Nachmanides. If you persist in saying I gave a non-answer then you are not likely ready to look at what you call evidence and I call interpretation. When only one interpretation of evidence is repeatedly given as fact, – throughout childhood and beyond, something which could be described as indoctrination and not education, then the existence of another interpretation is difficult to accept.
Prophets: This is a big subject. Suffice to say at this time that Jesus is not just a prophet. Jesus, YHWH, God the son, took on humanity and told us that after he rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, he would send the Holy Spirit to indwell believers thus no need for future messengers.
If you think there is no evidence that Jesus rose from the dead before Nicaea you need to do more research. An aside on this: I find it very hard to accept that Jesus’ disciples, knowing they were lying by saying he rose from the dead, would stick to their story when their lives were threatened. Discounting Judas, but including Paul, 11 out of these 12 apostles died horrific deaths because they believed in the resurrection. I haven’t found anyone who, knowing they were lying would die for that lie. A good book – one of many ‘Who moved the Stone’ gives a solicitor’s conclusion on the resurrection based on the evidence. Then there are the extra-Biblical accounts – Pliny and Trajan, Josephus etc – long before Nicaea. The Gnostics were heretics and this can be proved from the New Testament. You have the wrong idea about Constantine’s involvement. Heresies arose in the early church. They are well documented. Nicaea was convened, among other things to write a statement of faith. It was NOT the first statement of faith to be written. The Koine Greek gives us the correct understanding and the words used for resurrection mean bodily resurrection.
Incidentally – I’m not quite sure how I am meant to interpret your last 2 sentences. Do you think I am out of my depth or do you think my stance is untenable?
R Russell says
Keys,
I will not address your guess – it’s not my subject at this time.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear. When trying to be concise sometimes things get missed out. The Bible teaches that YHWH God created the universe unblemished and perfect. No death. Immortality for the living. That means every living thing was meant to live and never die. Because our first parents chose not to believe YHWH God, and act on their belief in preferring Satan’s narrative – that YHWH was holding out on them, they disobeyed the only instruction they were given not to do and thus altered the whole universe until Jesus returns. Death was never part of YHWH’s intention. Our first parents died spiritually immediately after they disobeyed. They died physically some time later. Thus they reaped what they sowed.
Evolution believes in millions of years of death and disease before man came on the Earth.
Scientific evidence has to be interpreted. Evolution is the Beginnings narrative of atheism and creation is the Beginnings narrative of Christianity. The science is interpreted. It is belief which gives it the interpretation. Atheists do not want a creator so their interpretation must exclude YHWH God. This is a quote from a now deceased evolution scientist, Richard Lewontin. He describes it quite well, in spite of evidence to the existence of YHWH, he refuses to believe there is a Creator:
“It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
Evolution is a belief.
Because you don’t want to know the reasons why I believe what I do, I have to conclude you will dismiss the belief, not based on evidence, but on what I say. Why is it not important to you to know there is evidence for a Christian Beginnings Narrative? Why do you believe there is only one interpretation of science?
Other readers may wish evidence even if you don’t so I will give only two links. The first one gives very short videos about a young Earth and the other is about scientific research. The choice is the readers – either to stick with the scientific explanation they have been taught all their lives or to explore one they know nothing about and up till now didn’t think existed.
I also suspect some will also emulate Lewontin
https://www.creationworldview.org/did-you-know/
http://www.icr.org/homepage/
Naildriver says
Yea sure, the Bible is not only the spoken word of god but predicts all sorts of science facts — and Nostradamus predicted the Kennedy assassination and the Pyramids can keep a razor blade sharp … to reply sarcastically.
Never mind that the Bible’s first OT part are books designed for the Jewish culture in a hostile world — where portions of it were copied from the Babylonians, such as the flood story — or conceived from Egyptian history, such as their one god concept.
You speak of science like it’s a plot to deceive people — No, science is a method at arriving at a probable truth. And, the process is perfectly designed to revise its conclusions with evidence, and invite impartial minds all over the world to test any hypothesis.
Actually you have it reversed — it is your need for a YHWH that has you insisting he be included when no such evidence exists — and your only ‘evidence’ is YOUR interpretations of scripture.
Wellington says
R Russell: No one can prove that Jesus is the Son of God, just as no one can prove the truth of the Trinity. Now, Jesus MAY be who you think he is but you can’t prove this. You must invoke faith for this.
As for the Bible in general, and specifically any miracles, including prophecies in it, the great Scottish philosopher, David Hume (1711-1776), pointed out that the only way one can accept the claim of a miracle (and prophecies are certainly in the miraculous category) is if the non-miraculous explanation for the matter in question would be even more astounding than the miraculous one. I submit (not meant in an Islamic way) that for every so-called miracle, including prophecies, in the Bible a non-miraculous explanation can be given which is not more astounding than the miraculous one. This is a major reason why I do not believe in any miracles.
gravenimage says
Most Christians accept science.
Carolyne says
You mean when Adam and Eve ate that apple at the behest of the talking snake? Right.
Rarely says
R Russell
I cannot conceive of an all-powerful, all-forgiving God that would care one way or the other how one prays or even what they believe. It is inconceivable that a “loving” God would sentence one of His kids to eternal damnation for anything, Could you, as an imperfect parent, imagine a child of yours doing anything that would cause you to damn him/her forever? I thought not. Such things are designed by man to control the flock. Islam controls the flock in a similar but much more violent way. It even allows perverts to enjoy their perversions with impunity.
No. God couldn’t care less what Dawkins believes or how he prays, if at all. That’s a religion thing to keep the contributions rolling in.
BTW There are few, if any, atheists on their death bed.
I agree with Dawkins — church bells have a kind of ring to them while a bunch of people yelling anything doesn’t , is aggressive and borders on being invasive.
One last point: Didn’t Dawkins announce a few years ago that he believed in a god, just in no religion or any religion’s concept of that god?
R Russell says
Rarely:-
YHWH is knowable. In fact He invites us to enter into a friendship with him. That is how much he loves us as individuals.
Allah, the God of Islam is unknowable. He doesn’t love unbelievers.
YHWH gives us free will. He gives us a choice. Therefore when people as individuals choose their own way they live with the consequences of their actions – in the same way a thief is imprisoned for the choice he made.
I have little time for religion either. You will have notices I have spoken of getting to know a loving YHWH God who loves us enough to give us the choice of loving him back or dismissing him from our lives.
You have done a sort of comparison, Christianity with Islam.
In Islam you can never be sure if you will enter janna unless you martyr yourself killing Allah’s enemies. Your good deeds need to outweigh your bad deeds. There is no assurance of entry for know one knows where the pass line is.
In Christianity it is totally different. YHWH knows we will never be perfect. Jesus knowing we cannot be perfect and knowing our choice of going our own way, demanded punishment, took our punishment on himself. That means we can get to know him. He invites you to get to know him. The choice is yours.
Rarely says
R Russell
I have no use for islam. The moral code Jesus advocated was quite good (often followed poorly by those who claim him). However all to often people try to assign human traits and motives to the Almighty in contradiction to each other. I stand be my comments above.
BTW Can you even imagine something a child of yours might do that is so bad it would cause you to assign him/her to hellfire for eternity?
Chand says
R Russell, when you say that the idea that ‘life originated in outer space’ is believed by some, you might be referring to the theory of panspermia, or the seeding of the earth with pre biotic organic molecules sometimes found in asteroids and meteorites striking earth. They could have then become ingredients in the first cells on earth.
But it does not mean a supernatural origin. It just began elsewhere.
R Russell says
Rarely,
You appear to be fixated on punishment.
I answered your question. People choose their own behaviour. That behaviour has consequences. The consequences are the result of their behaviour – good or bad. Thus when someone chooses to dismiss YHWH God the consequences are their own and not those of YHWH. Example: People chose to drink drive every day knowing what the consequences may be. The decision is theirs, not the bartender’s. No one would blame the bartender for the drunk driver’s behaviour and consequences, they would blame the drunk.
YHWH has what are called ‘attributes’. Some are his alone eg being eternal and others are communicable.
Getting to know YHWH God allows into our lives some of his power which brings about change not possible with will power alone. Perhaps this is where you think some people make God in their own image and not the other way around.
Jesus doesn’t expect us to follow a moral code which as you say is difficult to follow. He wants us to get to know him and become more like him by changing on the inside and not imposing rules from the outside.
R Russell says
Chand
You have a hypothesis, a belief, not fact
Chand says
Keys, how is Islam more in conflict with evolutionary theory than Christianity? Both are equally meaningless for scientific materialism and evolutionary theory, except as cultural and historical studies and to understand the phenomenon of religious beliefs in humans.
Religion assumes that a teleological principle drives evolution in the cosmos.
Scientific materialism is the opposite of that: blind evolution hits upon a species with self consciousness over time, and then there is man made religion.
Carolyne says
I agree with Dawkins about the pleasant sound of church bells as opposed to the camel braying sound of the call to prayer. After a while, though, one learns to actually sleep through it.
gravenimage says
R Russell, we have free speech in the West–unlike in Dar-al-Islam.
And no–Dawkins has never said that evolution is impossible. Moreover, you are mistaken in your apparent belief that all devout Christians reject science.
In fact, Christian curiosity about the physical world was one of the driving forces of the rise of the sciences.
R Russell says
You haven’t read what I wrote. You have written something from your own imagination. Devout Christians do not reject science.
Yes Christians did explore the world through science from a Biblical Christian worldview with a Creator
Science is open to interpretation. The ONLY interpretation taught to us for generations now is the atheistic evolution interpretation.
There is another interpretation of the same science. Some people find it difficult to consider because of their evolution indoctrination.
The way of salvation taught throughout the Bible is the need for a Saviour, the lamb of God, because our first parents chose to disobey, and as Paul says, sin passed to all men. The Bible teaches death is the result of the sin of our first parents. Evolution tells us death and disease have been around for millions of years before man came into existence. They are mutually exclusive.
Some prefer to stick with their indoctrination. That’s their choice. Others will examine the Christian interpretation of the same science the evolutionists use. Again their choice
Wellington says
So, you reject evolution. Hmmm. BTW, one can be a very competent scientist and have no belief in God or any religion. To be complete and fair, one can be a very competent scientist and have a profound belief in God and in the truth of a particular religion, for instance Christianity.
IanB says
I would respectfully add to Wellington’s comment that one can be a good person without belief in unevidenced supernatural entities by living by Moses’ commandments 4 through to 10, the Golden Rule, the example of the Good Samaritan, St Paul’s wonderful explanation of what love is in 1 Corinthians 13 and most of all living by pure innate conscience that all people except psychopaths have. Our and your conscience evolved through the effectiveness of altruism towards the survival of the mammal homo sapiens, it has no connection with any imaginary god.
Giacomo Latta says
Ooooohkay. Meanwhile, back on planet earth …
Zub says
Anything is better than that caterwauling bellowed off key 5 times a day. Having traveled a few Islamic countries myself I can honestly say it’s just outright awful.
Did anyone catch Katie Hopkins’ report about the call to prayer caterwauling across the Jewish quarter? Even her 1 minute long sample is enough to drive you nuts.
https://youtu.be/UdkPaU9xn7g
eduardo odraude says
Outrageous that Dawkins should be called racist over his comments. But there is one upside to everyone constantly being called “racist”. The insult becomes meaningless, like the SOS of the boy who cried “wolf!” too many times when there was no wolf.
Rarely says
If the right people are calling you a “racist” it’s really a compliment.
Georg says
The shahada sounds like a war cry and that’s approximately what it is. Church bells are lovely. End of story.
Rarely says
It’s why muslim choirs rarely get past the first round at competitive music festivals.
Carolyne says
Yep. Agree Georg
Buraq says
‘The Independent’ (a leftist ‘newspaper’ on-line) is currently running this article; and it says ‘The Arabic phrase “Allahu Akbar” is used at the beginning of the “azaan”, or call to prayer, and means “God is greatest”.
No, it does not!
The Arabic conjugation for the adjective ‘great’ is as follows; kabir – akbar – al akbar (great – greater-greatest) So, of course, Allahu Akbar does not mean ‘God is greatest’. Allahu Akbar means ‘God is greater’, meaning, my god is greater than your god!
However, I am forbidden from posting this explanation on ‘The Independent’ threads because my pro-Israel stance is anathema to those running this once-great newspaper. This once-great newspaper has banned all my posts submitted under the handle, Free Speech, because the so-called Independent has become a pulpit for Islam.
Paul says
Aren’t the Saudis major shareholders in that rag? Not so ‘independent’
if you ask me!
gravenimage says
+1
IanB says
Likewise for me.
Ren says
Not only does “Allahu Akbar” sound aggressive, it leads to insanity and violence.
Dennis says
It is a war cry. Any crime committed while bellowing these words should automatically be labelled a hate crime.
Lydia Church says
It’s not a ‘race’, besides being a religious race to take over the world.
Dennis says
What race are bells and aloha snackbar?
St. Manuel II Palailogos says
Ironic, since its basically his fault this is happening in the first place.
gravenimage says
No, Richard Dawkins is not responsible for the spread of Islam–in fact, he has often spoken out against it.
Unless this is just more about how–supposedly–it is only Orthodox Christians who are OK.
Wellington says
I have noticed over the years, gravenimage, that Orthodox Christians parrot the paranoia and xenophobia of the West that Russia geopolitically does. There’s a “connection” here I believe.
I would also note that while mainstream Protestantism, historically speaking, is certainly pro-Western, indeed it is my conviction that it took the Protestant world to “invent” America, something neither the Catholic nor Orthodox worlds would ever have done on their own initiative, there are nonetheless many elements in the Protestant world from the 16th and 17th century onwards to this very day that have an undying and blind hatred for Roman Catholicism.
As you know, I am not religious in the least, but the observations I made above I think are valid (otherwise why would I make them, eh?). To be complete, the Roman Catholic Church has much to answer for as well (especially since Vatican II), but it is my impression Roman Catholics don’t have the animus towards the Orthodox and Protestant worlds that these two so often do. A la Freud, religious envy?
gravenimage says
Agreed, Wellington. I know that not all Orthodox Christians are like this–indeed, I have met those who thankfully are not–but we unfortunately have a couple of the specimens you describe here.
And I agree with the rest of your analysis, as well–although, thankfully, not all Protestants hate Catholics. I think this is overall much rarer than it used to be.
Be well, and I hope it’s time to hoist a nice cold Yuengling.
DHazard says
What a weird world we live in where just stating a preference brings in the sharks who want your reputation and income instead of blood.
Wellington says
Were it the other way around, Dawkins would not be excoriated but praised. Double standard on display yet again. And for what? For Islam? Yuck!
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Cathedral bells, singing, dancing and clapping, are meant to draw the satan (Holy Spirit) nearer, while “Allah Akbar” scares the satan and gets him running away. That is why Richard Dawkins as worshiper of the satan likes to hear cathedral bells and hates to hear “Allah Akbar “glorifying Allah the creator of all , including the satan who was cursed by Allah for disobedience to Allah’s decree appointing Adam(man)as leader of all creatures. Alas! mithraist christians and evil Jews are worshiping the same satan the enemy of mankind in different ways. Fools!!
gravenimage says
The witless Ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
Cathedral bells, singing, dancing and clapping, are meant to draw the satan (Holy Spirit) nearer, while “Allah Akbar” scares the satan and gets him running away.
………………………
Ibrahim itace muhammed has said before that a loving God is “the satan”–the deity Muslims worship is savagely cruel. And Muslims scream “Allahu Akbar!” before slaughtering people–this is what passes for “worship” for brutal Muslims. *Ugh*.
More:
That is why Richard Dawkins as worshiper of the satan likes to hear cathedral bells and hates to hear “Allah Akbar “glorifying Allah the creator of all , including the satan who was cursed by Allah for disobedience to Allah’s decree appointing Adam(man)as leader of all creatures. Alas!
………………………
Of course, Richard Dawkins is quite famously an Atheist. But Muslims like Ibrahim itace muhammed do not care about facts–he considers *all* Westerners to be “filthy mithraist (sic) christians”. He has done the same thing here at Jihad Watch with Agnostics and Atheists.
More:
mithraist christians and evil Jews are worshiping the same satan the enemy of mankind in different ways. Fools!!
………………………
Ibrahim itace muhammed has also said that anyone who opposes the horrors of child marriage, rape, oppression, and mass murder is “worshiping the satan”. This exposes the sickening perversity of Islamic values.
Rarely says
Ibrahim.
Some more idiocy coming from your mouth.
BTW What’s your call on the little spat going on in Yemen where muslims are killing muslims by the thousand? Just exactly is it the fault of the U.S., Israel or the Jews?
Rarely says
…how is it the fault of the US, Israel and/or the Jews?
R Russell says
Ibrahim,
Have you asked the Bible Jesus to reveal himself to you?
He loves you even although you hate him
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
R Russel, i don’t hate true Jesus, I hate the satan god you call Holy Spirit appearing to you. True Jesus never reveal himself to you because you have offended him by worshiping him as God ,which he dislikes.
gravenimage says
As pious Muslims like Ibrahim itace muhammed sees it, the role of the “true Jesus”–the “prophet Isa”–is to mass slaughter all Christians.
Of course he doesn’t hate this.
Rarely says
Ibrahim.
How about Yemen? How did the US, Israel and/or the Jews get that going?
Rarely says
Ibrahim
Any god that can be offended isn’t worth having.
R Russell says
Ibrahim,
Until you examine the Koine Greek of the New Testament – provably the same Greek which was used in Mohammed’s time, you will have the wrong Jesus.
The Koine Greek teaches us to worship the Bible Jesus for it teaches us he is in essence the same as his Father and the Holy Spirit.
If you cannot accept the Koine Greek which was around when Mohammed was, I have to wonder on what you base your beliefs?
Paul says
@Iblis Incited Mohammedan,
Write whatever crap you like, the fact remains at the end of the day
that your ‘prophet’ was a child raping mass murderer who spoke
satan’s words. You will know all this from having read your own
ungodly Mohammedan sources. His disgusting perversion and blood
lust are, after all, the very reasons WHY you love him and emulate
him so much. Stop trying to drag people to hell with you.
Absolute scumbag.
gravenimage says
Ibrahim itace muhammed *loves* child rape and mass murder–he has defended both here many times.
Rarely says
As I said before: He’s my ENTIRE argument to restrict immigration. (with thanks to Groucho)
gravenimage says
He certainly presents an example.
Paul says
@gravenimage,
That’s exactly what we are dealing with here. I admire efforts
by some to convert him, and I would love it to come to something, but it
never will. He’s too depraved and he’s too proud of it.
gravenimage says
Hi, Paul. I don’t think Ibrahim itace muhammed is apt to leave Islam–he is too enamored with raping underaged children and mass slaughtering Infidels.
I reply to his vicious posts to expose his bs. Ugly, but quite instructive.
Paul says
Hello @gravenimage,
I completely agree with you. I was referring to the attempts made
by @R Russell (above, on another thread).
What you have to do with the likes of @Iblis Incited Mohammedan
and leftist scum is to chain them to those aspects of Mohammedanism
and call them out openly on it. This is who they are, it’s what they support
and it’s what they love above all else. They could change at any moment
and be as good as anyone else, or better, but they clearly won’t.
Their commitment will always be to the dark side.
gravenimage says
Thanks for the reply, Paul.
Carolyne says
He’s my ENTIRE argument to require castration of Muslim.
Giacomo Latta says
Sounds like your life is pretty miserable,there, **it*ace. Why not buy a pocket knife and declare jihad on the Nigerian Armed Forces. There’s 72 virgins in it for you!
gravenimage says
Richard Dawkins savaged as “racist” for saying cathedral bells more pleasant than “aggressive-sounding Allahu Akbar”
………………….
Of course, there is nothing “racist” about this. The foul creed of Islam is not a race.
Kudos to him for speaking out!
housemusic1@frontier.com says
I read Mr. Dawkins books and heard him speak many times.
He is a man of reason and seeks the truth in the natural world.
He is opposed to religious belief systems, which are creations by men,
not of God and serve as power tools for men over men He appreciates other great things, which men created
like poetry, architecture..classical music, even the sound of.church bells, regardless
of what was written in the Bible……
Unknown says
As much as I don’t agree with him at some points (Christianity, mainly) but I agree with him when it comes to Islam. I really hope he finds the Truth, the Way and the Life before it’s too late.
George Williams says
What next, calling a preference for classical music over rock, bigotry? Are Catholics bigots because they prefer their religion over protestantism? Psychiatry needs to define a new syndrome as they did Stockholn syndrom for this willful denial and hostility towards the self evident truths that Islam is indeed what it seems to be, anathema to Western values, out to destroy all that we hold dear. Decades from now it will be discussed in psychiatry as the most profound mental illness of the 21st Century.
Matthieu Baudin says
Richard Dawkins has been a bit cavalier in the past in his criticism of Christianity. That said, today, as an ageing prominent intellectual he is stepping up to the task of giving comparative weight to his various critical comments concerning world religions and transmitted belief systems. Clearly he has now prioritised Islam as a leading civilisational threat, a force at loggerheads with the (atheist) humanist values that he holds. Dawkins is an ally for people of good will and has made an enormous contribution to the understanding of the transmission of beliefs within populations and how the curse of fanaticism is spread.
Carol the 1st says
Here’s his bibliography – I wonder if anyone has suggestions as to what’s a particularly good read?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins_bibliography
FYI says
At least Church bells are a call to genuine prayer to a God who preaches and teaches LOVE.
The islamic call to “prayer”{involving those insulting fatihas)is to a god of HATE.
a god who CURSES Jews and Christians koran 9:30
As for this “racist” nonsense:What?is it offensive to all those islam-faced,islam-colored folk?
But islam of course isn’t a race so playing the “racist” card won’t work,despite the best efforts of the islamic apologists and their leftard bedfellows.
I sympathise with the concerns Atheists have.Atheists need to understand that islam doesn’t tolerate non-belief.islam does not tolerate either secularism or our Judeo-Christian heritage.
God knows I tried hard to be an atheist myself;I don’t belong to any church{i dont like clergymen,holy joes..} but I’m thinking of establishing one for religious agnostics so i’ll need to use a bogus “saint”:
The Church of St Mithra
{The patron saint of Religious Agnostics,humor and satirical cartoons)
FYI says
People must have the perfect freedom to be free from religious tyranny if they wish.
I find satirical Swiftian ridicule of “holy” man and atheist humor funny.
My (Jesuit educated!)diehard atheist brother and official follower of Richard Dawkins once sent me a cartoon that insulted ALL world religions.
The corpse at a Humanist funeral?All dressed up to the nines and nowhere to go.
The corpse of a vatican cardinal?All dressed up to the nines and nowhere NICE to go
The corpse of a jihadist?All dressed up in white and somehere unpleasantly hot to go.
But then as ayatollah khomeni once said”There’s are no jokes in islam.There is no humor in islam.there is no fun in islam”…which always makes me laugh.
Well,there should be.
Carol the 1st says
Perhaps all of the humour is on the outside looking in?
duh swami says
‘If God creates all this suffering, he can’t be good’…’If he is powerless to stop it, he can’t be God’…Buddha…
Allah is a racist…An Arabic god, wrote a book in Arabic for Arabs i Arabia called Muslims…They are the ‘best of peoples, with the best features and the best hair…While Islam is an equal opportunity religion, , some Muslims are more equal than others…
Carolyne says
Its true. Many of them do have really thick hair. Unfortunately its on their shoulders and back.
Carol the 1st says
‘If God creates all this suffering, he can’t be good’…’If he is powerless to stop it, he can’t be God’…Buddha…
hmmm…I guess this is where the virtue of “faith” stepped in?
utis says
If islam is a race, so is atheism. Pick on an atheist, then you’re a racist, too.
Or, maybe, “race” and “racism” have been so devalued, they don’t mean a damn thing anymore — just the snob’s version of “nyah, nyah, nya, nyah, nyah!”
Aussie Infidel says
FYI, I agree with most of what you have written – Islam is vastly different to Christianity. Although I was raised a Christian, I have been an atheist – pure and simple – for over 70 years. However, I believe in freedom of religion and all the other freedoms as spelled out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – not as written in our Constitutions. In the context of the UDHR, freedom of religion also implies ‘freedom from religion’ (no coercion by others), and Islam, would fail to make the grade, because it is more a violent political ideology than a religion. But the Muslims rejected the UDHR and drafted their own Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI), which being Sharia compliant, is the antithesis of the UDHR.
Many atheists are Leftists who ironically support Islam against their ‘old enemy’ – Christianity. If the Muslims ever succeed in their objective of world-wide conquest, do the leftists imagine that the Muslims would allow them to set up some Socialist Utopia within their Caliphate? They would be the first to be ‘invited to Islam’ and asked to recite the Shahadah – or be executed like millions before them.
As for Dawkins, he says that he “never used abusive speech against Islam” and was instead targeting ‘Islamism’ – a fundamentalist interpretation of the religion??
In the past, Dawkins has often spoken out against Islam. But is he now bowing to political correctness?
The fundamentals of Islam are written in the Quran, and Islamic fundamentalists believe in following the Quran to the letter. That’s still Islam, not Islamism. The Quranic verses literally mean what they say; they are not open to interpretation. How else would anyone interpret verse 9:5, the infamous ‘verse of the sword’?
“And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists (Pagans & Christians) wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Quran 9:5). NB: To Muslims, ‘Repent’ means to accept Islam; and then of course there is no need for further fighting.
Or verse 9:29 on dhimmitude?
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth (Islam) from those who were given the Scripture (Jews & Christians) – [fight] until they give the jizyah (protection tax) willingly while they are humbled (as dhimmis or second class citizens).” (Quran 9:29).
The fact that many Muslims don’t follow the Quran as closely as others, doesn’t alter what it says or commands. Muslims might differ in their behaviour to those commands, but Islamic doctrine remains the same. Those who don’t follow the Quran are in fact Muslims in name only.
Politicianophobia says
Westman, you might consider adding Brothers In Arms cranked as loud as possible to your list or Mario Lanza singing I’ll Walk with God.
IanB says
Can we add the fourth movement of Beethoven’s 9th symphony please?
kevin king says
I’m not a christian but I can spot a coward when I see one. Richard Dawkins. A man who cannot demonise Christianity enough, keeps his mouth firmly shut when it comes to Islam, qualifying his comments to appease his opponents, something he would never do were these critics chrisitians. If here were true to his principles he would have railed against the industrialised levels of rape and torture by muslims in the UK over the last 40 years against underage white girls….Not a word lost on these unfortunate souls, but he knows. For sure. A truly despicable human being, the sort only the English middle class could produce.
gravenimage says
Actually, Dawkins is *not* keeping his mouth shut re Islam. He is speaking out.
kouldb says
Dawkins has made a career out of ridiculing & denigrating Christians. He then lambasted & labelled Brexiteers are racist bigots. He got what he deserved as far as I’m concerned.