1. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160341 by Tauriq on April 14, 2008 at 1:11 am

Ravenhill has obviously not read anything of Dawkins or Dennett. He would know that Dawkins and Dennet both propose an objective view of ALL religions. Even Ravenhill is focussing ONLY on Christianity - what about Islamic architecture? What about the translations of Arabic scholars of Aristostle, scholars "inspired by God" (whatever Ravenhil means by that). He is also averse to using "atheist" as if it is a poisoned word that will hurt him.

He should know that Dawkins wants exactly that: a view of the Bible as simply literature. I am a novelist myself and have used the Bible many times, as the English is amazing. But, my atheism does not stop me from appreciating various "religious" iconography. Ravenhill also forgets about the time period many artists created there great works in - who had the money, the "sponsorship deals", the power, to give to the artists? Pagans and secularists? No! The Church. As Dawkins says often: "we will never know what would have happened if Michaelangelo was asked to pain the ceiling of the Science Museum."

This article has wafts of unread scholarship, denial of atheist open-mindedness and wondering why a secular scientist could be worshipped. Wouldn't deifying a man promoting the destruction of deification of anykind be contradictory? This article holds no water and it is quite sad to see such trash from such a usually reliable paper. And I'm writing from South Africa.