Dawkins-Craig Debate, Genocide, Israel's Occupation of Palestine

Packed-in crowd at The Sheldonian.

The Oxford Student newspaper reads, "Christian apologist William Lane Craig addressed a packed Sheldonian theatre this week, in the absence of Richard Dawkins."[1] On a truly historic day, in what may be the biggest news story for Christians in a long time, the leading defender of Atheism, Dr. Richard Dawkins, has declined the most straightforward challenge to debate yet. The leading defender of Theism, Dr. William Lane Craig, has underscored the implications of his challenge by setting out an empty chair in Dr. Dawkins' university town of Oxford England.

Dr. Dawkins has declared that Dr. Craig is below his standards as an intellectual. However, Dr. Craig has two earned doctoral degrees, while Dawkins has one earned doctoral degree. Craig has served as a legitimate professor while Dawkins' service as a legitimate professor of science was questionable with subjects in his resume such as mind reading and Memetics being labeled as pseudo science on numerous fronts.[2] "British author Paul Johnson called it (Dawkins chair as a professor) ‘Oxford’s first Chair of Atheism.’ But true (operational) science involves repeatable, observable experimentation in the present, which includes physics, chemistry, experimental biology and geology, etc. ... Dawkins has made no notable contributions to any of these, or even to the history or philosophy of science."[3] Dr. Craig has 47 books listed as published at Amazon, while Dawkins has 12 published books to date.

Instead of showing up to debate October 25th, some of Dawkins' supporters stood outside and handed out copies of one of his articles, "Why I Won't Debate William Lane Craig." In lieu of a live debate, Craig offered a series of points as to why Dawkins' book, "The God Delusion" doesn't pass muster.

Dawkins had called Craig a "deplorable apologist for Genocide" and Craig discussed how Dawkins misused the word genocide. Dawkins also seems to have a misunderstanding of what his moral relativism implies. For if Dawkins were truly a moral relativist he would rightly understand he has no objective reason to find anyone else's beliefs morally reprehensible. In any event, by highlighting the Israeli conquest of Canaan in approximately 13C BCE, Dawkins is inadvertently supporting Israel's claim to the occupied territories. Since he didn't show up to discuss anything, we'll have to try and interpret the deeper meaning of Dawkins' statements and the fallout of Dawkins' absence.

Dawkins shows up as a leaflet.

I. Dawkins' moral outrage about Canaan is illogical

Dawkins has officially collapsed. Being unable to defend his "God Delusion" in live debate, he and his followers have sunken to the level of handing out sheets of propaganda. In attempting to take the moral high ground he is highlighting his lack of intellectual rigor, for moral relativists have no objective moral ground to stand upon. This lack of intellectual rigor carries over into his misuse of the word genocide in his article. But, again, this brings us a golden opportunity to consider what the historic systematic genocides have looked like by those who support Militant Atheism, the dark brand of Atheism Mr. Dawkins embraces.

First, consider Dawkins' moral relativism:

"So, for example, I can show that from a Darwinian point of view there is more Darwinian advantage to a male in being promiscuous and a female being faithful, without saying that I therefore think human males are justified in being promiscuous and cheating on their wives. There is no logical connection between what is and what ought."[4]

"Now, if you then ask me where I get my 'ought' statements from, that's a more difficult question. If I say something is wrong, like killing people, I don't find that nearly such a defensible statement as 'I am a distant cousin of an orangutan"[5]

Try again..

When Dawkins claims there is "no logical connection between what is and what ought" he's basically admitting he believes there is no objective and logical foundation for his ethics. Does it make sense for someone with no objective basis for ethics to be morally outraged by people's actions from a completely different culture over three thousand years ago? Not likely. Dawkins' logical collapse is coupled with his misuse of the word genocide, as it relates to the land of Canaan. His response to the Craig debate challenge seemed to be an epic fail.

Webster's Dictionary definition of genocide:

"the systematic killing of all the people from a national, ethnic, or religious group, or an attempt to do this"[6]

Encyclopedia Britannica's summary of Canaan:

"The Israelites occupied and conquered Palestine, or Canaan, beginning in the late 2nd millennium BC, or perhaps earlier; and the Bible justifies such occupation by identifying Canaan with the Promised Land, the land promised to the Israelites by God."[8]

In contrast to genocide, God's commission to the Israelites was not centered on killing certain people due to their nationality, ethnicity or specific religion, but God's commission to the Israelites was based on a certain piece of real estate that had been defiled by wickedness and was to be redeemed for God's purposes. This land was promised to the Israelites long before the name "Palestine" was adopted by the Roman Empire from words "Philistia" and "Philistine" in 1C ACE. By bringing up the subject of Canaan, Dawkins is actually helping to support the case of pro-Israel supporters who believe Israel has a right to the occupied territories. The promise made to Abraham was in approximately 2220 BCE:

"On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates - the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites." (Genesis 15:18-21, NIV)

If the Canaanite people had left these lands, there would have been no battles and no killing, because they were not going on a mission to hunt down a certain people group, as the German Nazis hunted down the Jews. The promise of the land was the main priority and the purity of the land was the second priority, as outlined in later scriptures. The people of the land was only incidental but it was their wickedness that was detestable and could not be allowed to continue there in that place alongside the Israelites.

II. Israel's conquest of Canaan is morally justified

In contrast to Dawkins' moral relativism, the Bible teaches that there are absolute standards of morality, but many people don't understand how this may be exemplified in the case of the Canaanites. The ultimate reference point for moral truth is the person of God who is holy, just and loving. If there is a case in which God is not exemplifying one of these characteristics, it's likely we don't fully understand the situation. When we closely examine how and why the Israelites invaded Canaan, then we can understand its justification.

The first question to ask is, "If God created the universe and all that is in it, is God justified in giving life and taking it away?" If any secular atheist wishes to say "No" I have not seen a valid reason for it. This same question relates to the request for Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. Once it has been established that God does indeed have the right to give and take life, then the mechanics of the details of historic events only serve to confirm that God's decisions are just and true.

Long before the invasion of Canaan, God informed Abraham of this event. In Genesis 15, God tells Abraham: "In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure. The people of the land of Canaan were apparently immoral, but God would allow them to spiral deeper and deeper into their moral abyss before Joshua would invade 440 years later, at which time the land would be given over to the people of Israel by God.

According to a testimony of Rahab the harlot, the people of Canaan had known that Israel would invade and conquer them, as shown in Joshua 2:9:

Rahab's rehab.

"I know that the LORD has given this land to you and that a great fear of you has fallen on us, so that all who live in this country are melting in fear because of you."

God gave the Canaanites 440 years to repent or to leave the land but they didn't. Even as Joshua conquered each city one by one, the people knew what was happening and had the possibility of fleeing.  Jericho was the first Canaanite city the Israelites chose to attack. Rahab the harlot saw her people's fear and heard how God helped Israel leave Egypt. She lived off the grid, so to speak, in between the two outer walls of the city of Jericho. She met the enemy first hand when spies came from Israel to scope out Jericho. Convinced that Israel would win the battle, she decided to put her trust in them and side with them in exchange for her salvation. Rahab was correct in her assessment that God would supernaturally assist the Israelites. Rehab's rehab was both a physical relocation and a spiritual one. Colossians 1.13 speaks of the grace of God, "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son."

The writings of Moses describe the Canaan commission:

"Observe, I am going to send an Angel before you, to guard you along the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Guard yourselves before Him and obey His voice, and do not be rebellious toward Him, for He will not pardon your transgression, since My Name is in Him. But if you truly obey His voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. For My Angel will go before you and bring you in to the land of the Amorite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Canaanite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, and I will completely destroy them." (Exodus 23:20–23).

"When Jehovah your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, you will clear away many nations from before you the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you. And when Jehovah your God delivers them before you, and you utterly defeat them, then you will completely destroy them. You will make no covenant with them and you will show no grace to them...And you will consume all the peoples whom Jehovah your God delivers to you. your eye will not pity them, neither will you serve their gods, for that would be a snare to you." (Deuteronomy 7:1–2,16).

"Only in the cities of these peoples that Jehovah your god is giving you as an inheritance, you will not leave alive anything that breathes, but you will utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, and Jehovah your God has commanded you, in order that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against Jehovah your God." (Deuteronomy 20:16–18).

Is this big enough?

These verses emphasize the wickedness of the people who had given themselves so completely to idolatry that not even the animals could be left alive. If you understand the sexual nature of the Canaanite idolatry and the manner in which this ultimately destroys a society, then you will understand in what respects this would have been necessary. To begin to grasp what the environment would have probably been like, consider a description of Sodom before it was destroyed.

The example of Sodom

"Before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people from every quarter; and they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with them." But Lot went out to them at the doorway, and shut the door behind him, and said, "Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly. Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof." But they said, "Stand aside." Furthermore, they said, "This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them." (Genesis 19.4-9)

These few verses and the words of Lot imply that bisexual relations, pedophilia and brutal gang rape were prevalent and considered normal in the city of Sodom prior to its destruction. According to this scriptural perspective, a society can become so wicked and sick that it is unsafe to visit for just one evening. From a human perspective murder is immoral on all occasions, but from God's perspective morality is weighed against His eternal plan and character. If a society continues to reject God and to choose ever deepening levels of depravity, then it is God's prerogative to end the life He created. This applies whether we are talking about Sodom, Canaan, or the Great Tribulation. Jesus affirmed that God relates to people on different levels, both as individuals and as societies.

In Luke 10.13, Jesus said, "What sorrow awaits you, Korazin and Bethsaida! For if the miracles I did in you had been done in wicked Tyre and Sidon, their people would have repented of their sins long ago, clothing themselves in burlap and throwing ashes on their heads to show their remorse."

Life is a gift - depravity is a choice - depravity leads to death

Most atheists don't have a moral problem if an earthquake destroys a city because they don't believe in God. But because God in the scriptures specifically called on the Israelites to kill all the living things in Canaan, atheists find that immoral and unforgivable. This contrast of opinion shows a lack of understanding with regard to the nature of God's sovereignty from an eternal perspective. The Rabbi Charles Feinberg helps explain these principles as he describes the Akeda, the Jewish term for the binding of Isaac. In his article, "The Akedah: Feelings and Principle" Feinberg explains the importance of seeing life as a gift from God.[7] When you understand God as creator and Lord,  then you are more able to accept, as Job did, "The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised." (Job 1.21 NIV)


Going from a less personal and spiritual perspective to more a more cultural one, consider the ramifications of a society in a moral free-fall that is gasping for its last breath. Ancient Rome was a society in a downward tailspin until Christ and Christianity helped to resurrect its sick and dying culture. Rome had taken what was secret and sacred and turned it into a public performance of perversion. I don't want to get into too many of the graphic historical details, but consider that bestiality was not only practiced in Rome in secret, it was demonstrated in the colosseums for entertainment. The lowest level of prostitutes in Rome were known to perform sex with animals if requested.

Sacrificing to Molech

As bad as Rome was, there are reasons to believe that Canaan was even more debased than ancient Rome. In Rome human babies weren't sacrificed to the gods, but the gods of the Canaanites, Molech and Baal, were supposedly grateful for such sacrifices. Babies would be placed onto the sizzling hot bronze arms of a standing statue of an idol that had a fire burning inside. As the babies sizzle death the parents weren't to show any signs of remorse because that would supposedly discredit the sacrifice, so the parents rejoiced. This would tend to sear and harden the conscience of the most caring of people.Promiscuous sex with temple prostitutes apparently helped to please the pagan goddess Asherah. The the Canaanites were conquered in 1210 BCE, nevertheless, some of their practices continued and were noted in 6 BCE during the reign of King Jossiah. The king "tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the Lord and where women did weaving for Asherah." (2 Kings 23:7)

The choice of death and the choice of life

What are the consequences of a society that hardens its collective conscience and engages in every possible sick perversion? Children would not likely be raised in a healthy, loving home with a caring mother and father in this environment. They would more likely become the victims of repeated and brutal child molestation. And studies show that children who have been molested carry physical and emotional scars for the rest of their lives and are more likely to abuse their own children. These are the types of sins that carry over from one generation to the next.

When you couple zoophilia with pedophilia the problems compound exponentially. There have been at least 41 diseases known to be communicable from animals to people.[9] Children who have been repeatedly molested would likely carry sexually transmitted diseases and other diseases garnered from those practicing zoophilia. This was at a time before helpful medical treatment was available. The killing of all the livestock and animals and all the people would help to ensure that all diseases would be taken care of and this may have been the only way in which to save the entire population from death. Death and peace with God may have been a welcome experience in comparison to living in a sick society where pedophilia, child abuse and broken homes were likely commonplace.

For those who study the scriptures, it helps to remember a simple phrase, "The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed." This picture of Canaan warfare offers a perspective on spiritual warfare, that we are to take no prisoners, so to speak, and that it is a fight to the death. Romans 6.23 in the New Testament teaches that "The wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life." Rachel the Canaanite harlot was given new life simply by surrendering to Joshua. In a similar manner, the worst of sinners can at any time find life by surrendering his or her life to Jesus Christ.

III. The genocides of militant atheist leaders are not morally justified

How does the territorial conquest of Canaan by Joshua compare with the genocides conducted by famous dictators motivated by Militant Atheism? Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar names names:

"Militant atheism inevitably caused extensive repressions and genocide everywhere - in Hitler's Germany, in Lenin's and Stalin's Russia, in Pol Pot's Cambodia and now in Myanmar,"[10]

Hitler's legacy of Militant Atheism

The Nazi Fascist Darwin connection.

Hitler was responsible for 6 million Jewish deaths and 12 million general concentration camp deaths. Was Hitler a Christian or was he just deceiving people in Germany to gain support? Hitler was highly influenced by Friedrich Nietzsche, who also promoted the Aryan elite and the Darwinist resolution. Both came from Christian backgrounds with Hitler growing up in a Catholic home and Nietzsche in a Protestant one. But while Nietzsche was more open in his scathing criticism of Christianity, Hitler kept his contempt secret, probably so that he could deceive the many German Christians into following him. Goebbels recorded a conversation with Hitler in his diary in which Hitler had "expressed his revulsion against Christianity. He wished that the time were ripe for him to be able to openly express that. Christianity had corrupted and infected the entire world of antiquity." This is an idea Nietzsche held, that it would take time for people to ultimately realize "the death of God" and people weren't yet ready.[11]

As a part of Nietzsche's reevaluation of all values, Hitler could justify his own worship. As Nero Claudius Caesar demanded the greeting of "Hail Caesar," the Nazi's "Heil Hitler" was obligatory as well. True Christians were despised by the Nazis because true believers worshiped the true Messiah and Savior, Jesus Christ, and not this false supplanter of values. The militant atheist Adolf Hitler committed the most infamous acts of genocide by singling out the Jews for extermination. The people of Israel under Joshua had no interest in killing any particular people group but were interested in simply occupying the land of Canaan and establishing a righteous society there.

The following quotes underscore that Hitler was a militant atheist in his own right. Anti-Christian Quotes from Hitler's journal, of which there are more, are documented in "The book Hitler's Secret Conversations,"[12]

"Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure." (p 43)

"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State." (p 49-52)

"Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.... .... When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunized against the disease." (p 118 & 119)

Stalin's legacy of Militant Atheism

Militant farming.

Joseph Stalin was a Marxist and therefore a militant atheist. Marx advocated the aggressive extermination of religion, regarded as a tool of bourgeois oppression. Stalin had his own form of repression in mind, as historical posters indicate.

Stalin founded the League of Militant Atheists, whose chief aim was to propagate militant atheism and eradicate religion. In 1929, Joseph Stalin began a campaign of racist oppression against ethnic Ukrainians. Over 5,000 Ukrainian scholars, scientists, cultural and religious leaders were falsely accused of plotting an armed revolt. Those arrested were either shot without a trial or deported to prison camps in remote areas of Russia. Between 1932 and 1933 Stalin was believed to have slaughtered 7,000,000 Ukrainians through forced starvation. Unreasonable grain quotas was forcefully taken from the Ukrainian farmers but little, if any, was given back to the local people who produced it. Borders were sealed off essentially making all of Ukraine a concentration death camp. Alexander Solzhenitsyn estimates the loss of life from state repression and terrorism from October 1917 to December 1959 under Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev at 66.7 million.[13]

“I believe in one thing only, the power of human will.” - Joseph Stalin[14]

The Asian legacy of Militant Atheism

Pol pot was an active Marxist as a student in Paris France before returning to Cambodia where he eventually became secretary-general of the underground Cambodian Communist Party in 1962. He desired to live "untainted" by Buddhism and by 1975, he was given authority to carry out "his vision of an agrarian utopia by emptying the cities, abolishing money, private property and religion and setting up rural collectives."[15] Like Vladimir Lenin, Pol Pot was an intellectual who then outlawed intellectualism once he gained power. "Anyone thought to be an intellectual of any sort was killed. Often people were condemned for wearing glasses or knowing a foreign language."[16] Pol Pot was known for his desire "not to waste a bullet" but, rather, to fill his killing fields by having people's skulls cracked with the blunt end of a farm instrument or the butt end of a rifle. Dimitry V. Pospielovsky outlined how Marxism encouraged a violent, anti-religious  militant atheism.[17] In contrast to the historic Israeli occupation of Canaan, Pol Pot's killings were based on class warfare and anti-religious genocide. Buddhist monks, Muslims, Christians, Western-educated intellectuals, and specific ethnic groups were targeted for killings. "Between 1975 and 1979 his regime claimed the lives of more than 1m people - through execution, starvation and disease - as the Khmer Rouge tried to turn Cambodia back to the middle ages."[18] Estimates of the total number of deaths resulting from Khmer Rouge policies, including disease and starvation, range from 1.7 to 2.5 million out of a population of around 8 million.[19]

When carrying propaganda is the law.

As brutal as Pol Pot was, he doesn't compare with militant atheist Mao Ze-Don. The overall worst genocide of the 20th Century was by Mao Ze-Dong in China and Tibet (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) A staggering estimate of 49 to 78 million people were killed in his genocides. The chart at this link lists Mao Ze-Dong at the top of the list as the greatest perpetrator of genocide in history.[20] "Under this militant atheism espoused by Mao Zedong, houses of worship were shut down; Buddhist pagodas, Daoist temples, Christian churches, and Muslim mosques were destroyed; artifacts were smashed; and sacred texts were burnt. Moreover, it was a criminal offense to even possess a religious artifact or sacred text."[21] Though it was a crime to carry any religious text, it was required by law to carry propaganda booklets, as shown in the Chinese propaganda poster.

Conclusion

Atheism is the denial of the truth of God's existence.  If true, it is the denial of many more truths, because everything, all principles, all logic and all truth originate with God. Because God does exist, at its very foundation, the denial of God is illogical, as is the denial of all reality that proceeds from God. And so at every simple step the atheist apologist stumbles in debate. Dawkins' intellectual collapse before the truth of God is reminiscent of the fearful collapse of Canaan before the truth of God. The walls of Jericho collapsed inward before the Israelites burned the city down, as confirmed by archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon:

“The destruction was complete. Walls and floors were blackened or reddened by fire, and every room was filled with fallen bricks, timbers, and household utensils; in most rooms the fallen debris was heavily burnt, but the collapse of the walls of the eastern rooms seems to have taken place before they were affected by the fire.”[22]

Atheists will comment that "Craig uses a flurry of arguments and overwhelms his opponents, but the atheist has better arguments anyway." No, Craig uses many points and arguments simply because the preponderance of evidence supports the reality of God's existence. Atheist debaters could also use a flurry of arguments, if they wanted to, but they simply don't have any to begin with. The fact that Dawkins and his followers have resulted to handing out propaganda in lieu of a live debate is an ominous sign. Looking back in history, atheist totalitarian dictators have always felt the need to marginalize and eventually kill intellectuals because all truth, even as proposed by agnostics, points to God's existence. Atheist regimes top the genocide list. Throughout history, we've seen the atheist dreams of anti-religious utopias turn into nightmares.

Richard Dawkins is showing his stripes as a militant atheist. In refusing to debate William Lane Craig, while at the same time claiming intellectual superiority, he is demonstrating his penchant for atheist hegemony. In attempting to marginalize Christians and anyone who believes the Bible, rather than debate them, Dawkins is utilizing one of the tactics militant atheists have used throughout history. Dawkins is not interested in truth but, rather, his desire for atheist hegemony is one of the first steps towards totalitarianism. His attempts to demonize Jews and Christians with false accusations of genocide is actually helping to pave the way for the future genocide of Christians, as prophesied by Christ in Matthew 24.9:

"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me."

The moral relativism Dawkins espouses is the main cause for the widespread corruption in the world, which leads to unrest, which leads to a loss of civil rights. What will it be like 20 years after the collapse of the United States? If we continue on in the direction we are headed in, we will find ourselves in a militant, totalitarian atheist state. Dawkins' criticisms of Craig and the demonization of theism are reminiscent of comments by Nietzsche. While Nietzsche and Hitler realized the time was not ripe for fully expressing "the Death of God." Dawkins seems to want to promote this view, even if he cannot defend it logically.

By drawing attention to The Israeli conquest of Canaan, Dawkins is underscoring the fact that the name Palestine isn't such an ancient name. It was given by the Romans during the first century ACE as a substitute for the name Philistine. In comparison, the Israeli occupation of the Promised Land dates back to the 13th century BCE and the takeover of Canaan. It should be noted that the Koran and Islam call for the death and genocide of infidels in general and Jews in particular, while Judaism and Christianity have no such mandate.

If you are a Christian, remember the Israelites entered Canaan by following the ark, the symbol of God's presence: "When you see the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, and the Levitical priests carrying it, you are to move out from your positions and follow it." (Joshua 3.3, NIV) And remember the walls of collapsed as the people simply showed up and lived by faith. Entering Canaan was symbolic of entering into a spiritual life. The Canaanite society was so dedicated to base perversions and was so diseased and corrupted that it was, in a sense, already dead, thus symbolizing the sin nature, as identified in Romans 7.18: "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwells no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not." In contrast, living a spiritual life dedicated to God brings life, as shown in Romans 8.13, "For if you go in the way of the flesh, death will come on you; but if by the Spirit you put to death the works of the body, you will have life."

If you are an atheist or agnostic, consider that Rahab the harlot lived in between the two outer walls of Jericho. In a sense she live in a proverbial place of indecision, "on the fence" so to speak. But as she saw the fear of the Canaanites around her, she recognized that the God of Israel was the true and living God and then she chose to side with the truth and was saved. I would ask you to consider the fear exhibited by "The Four Horsemen of the Anti-Apocalype" and, especially the lead horseman, Richard Dawkins, and then choose wisely. No matter how base your sins may be or may have been, God's redemption and forgiveness is all-sufficient through Christ.

Tags: Richard Dawkins versus William Lane Craig debate, cowardice of Richard Dawkins, Dawkins quotes on moral relativism, list of sins of Canaan, why did God order massacre of Canaan? Was Canaan a genocide? Dawkins quotes, cowardice of New Atheists, logical failure of atheism today, atheist logical collapse, atheist hegemony and censorship of religion, atheist regimes top the genocide list, greatest genocides in history? Who committed greatest genocide? false atheist dream of a utopia without acknowledging God,

References

[1] Oxford Student, Craig strikes back at genocide smear
[2] Richard Dawkins' CV lists an article on animal mind reading, "Animal signals: mind-reading and manipulation", while his book The Selfish Gene proposes Memetics. Both subjects are widely considered pseudo science. James W. Polichak's Memes as Pseudoscience and The Skeptic encyclopedia of pseudoscience both outline why Memetics is considered pseudoscience. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_publications_by_Richard_Dawkins#Academic_papers) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_topics_characterized_as_pseudoscience)
[3] Conservapedia, Quote by British author Paul Johnson (http://conservapedia.com/Richard_Dawkins)
(http://oxfordstudent.com/2011/10/27/craig-strikes-back-at-genocide-smear/)
[4] Dr. Richard Dawkins interviewed by Nick Pollard at New College, published in Third Way in the April 1995 edition (vol 18 no. 3) February 28th, 1995
[5] Ibid.
[6] Merriam Webster, genocide, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genocide
[7] Encyclopædia Britannica, Canaan, (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/91488/Canaan)
[8] Ada Israel, The Akedah: Feelings and Principle, (http://www.adasisrael.org/upimages/downloads_sermons/AKEDAH-Feelings%20and%20Principles-RH-5771.pdf)
[9] HPA, 41 diseases translated from animals to humans: (http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/Zoonoses/TableZoonoticDiseases/)
[10] Russia - Interfax-Religion, Russian chief rabbi thanks people for saving Jews from Nazi (http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=4208)
[11]  Elke Frölich. 1997-2008. Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels. Munich: K. G. Sauer. Teil I, v. 6, p. 272.
[12] The book Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944 published by Farrar, Straus and Young, Inc.first edition, 1953, contains definitive proof of Hitler's real views. The book was published in Britain under the title, _Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944, which title was used for the Oxford University Press paperback edition in the United States.   (http://www.doxa.ws/social/Hitler.html)
[13]( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/653192/posts)
[14] (http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/stalin.htm)
[15] BBC News, Pol Pot: Life of a tyrant, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/78988.stm)
[16] Ibid.
[17] Pospielovsky, Dimitry V., A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 1: A History of Marxist-Leninist Atheism and Soviet Anti-Religious Policies, St Martin's Press, New York (1987) pg 21
[18] BBC News, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/78988.stm)
[19] Peace Pledge Union Information – Talking about genocides – Cambodia 1975 – the genocide(http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia1.html)
[20] Piero Scaruffi, 1900-2000: A century of genocides (http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html)
[21] Conservapedia, Militant Atheism, cited The Price of Freedom Denied: Religious Persecution and Conflict in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge Studies in Social Theory, Religion and Politics). Cambridge University Press. also, Bryan S. Turner. Religion and Modern Society: Citizenship, Secularisation and the State. Cambridge University Press.  (http://conservapedia.com/Militant_atheism)
[22] Answers in Genesis, The Walls of Jericho, Archaeology Confirms: They Really Did Come A-tumblin’ Down, (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v21/n2/the-walls-of-jericho#fnList_1_8)

Photos of Sheldonian event from Reasonable Faith forum.

(article revised 04/05/13)

Related:

7 Reasons why Dawkins' Excuses for not Debating Craig are Illogical

Why Atheists Fear Debate

Why Top Atheist Apologists Avoid Logic Like The Plague

Recommended: