Dawkins v Mark Roberts
Well no, not really, it is ‘Christopher Hitchens v Mark Roberts’! But both Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens come from the same stable along with Sam Harris. These are the three major atheist missionaries to the West through their books and the high profile given them by the media – controversy sells. I have not read Christopher Hitchens', god is not Great, but reading the reviews and debates on Christopher Hitchens he seems to have much in common with Dawkins. There are links to two other articles on Hitchens on this site, one with Hitchens in The God Debate with the distinguished theologian, Douglas Wilson and the other, Hitchens v Hitchens. The three authors follow the same tack of the undesirability and danger of religion in the world. Although 9/11 came about through Islamic extremism, it is Christianity that gets the brunt of their attacks. Hitchins and Dawkins are very aggressive in their language over religion wanting all religion eliminated from this world.
What Mark Roberts addresses in his blog following his debate with Christopher Hitchens can be equally applied to Richard Dawkins. Both use the same ploys and even similar sources to undermine Christian belief. For instance, Richard Dawkins says on page 95 of TGD:
“The American biblical scholar Bart Ehrman, in a book where the subtitle is The Story Behind Who Changed the New Testament and Why, unfold the huge uncertainty befogging the New Testament text. (see footnote [not noted]). In the introduction of the book, Professor Ehrman movingly charts his personal educational journey from the Bible-believing fundamentalist to thoughtful sceptic, a journey driven by his dawning realisation of the massive fallibility of the scriptures. Significantly, as he moved up the hierarchy of American universities, from rock bottom at the ‘Moody Bible Institute', through Wheaton College (a little bit higher on the scale, but still the alma mater of Billy Graham) to Princeton in the world-beating class at the top, he was at every step warned he would have trouble maintaining his fundamentalist Christianity in the face of dangerous progressivism. So it proved, and we, his readers, are the beneficiaries.”
Hitchins appears to have drawn heavily on Ehrman for reasons one can read in the reviews. Hitchins' use of Ehrman is enough for Mark Roberts to give it personal attention. Besides Robert's review of Ehrman in his response to Hitchins' god is not Great, one has a choice of reading an abbreviated or fuller review of Ehrman's book by Daniel B. Wallace who informs us that “the book simply doesn't deliver what the title promises. But it sells well: since its publication on November 1, 2005, it has been near the top of Amazon's list of titles. And since Ehrman appeared on two of NPR's programs (the Diane Rehm Show and “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross)—both within the space of one week—it has been in the top fifty sellers at Amazon.”
One can find another more extensive review in Roberts for his readers on Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus but from its high profile one can appreciate why Christopher Hitchens would use Bart Ehrham, which he apparently does much more than does Dawkins. For this reason Mark Roberts takes time to address this in his website. Dr. Mark Roberts is a New Testament scholar and serves as senior pastor to Irvine Presbyterian Church USA.
About his debate with Christopher Hitchens Mark Roberts states, “I did not bring up the Ehrman book. Hugh did, I believe, because it figures prominently in god is not Great (Link to: “Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris on website).
Says Roberts, “Though there are many fine insights in Misquoting Jesus, (In the quote above Dawkins uses the subtitle of this book: The Story Behind Who Changed the New Testament and Why), I don't generally recommend it because it has much that is distorted and unhelpful. In fact, I wrote a substantial critique of this book shortly after it was published.”
Mark Roberts provides an excellent Christian resource with his website. To read Mark Roberts on his response to his debate with Christopher Hitchens . . .
Revised 24/08/07
