One reporter's notebook
A response to Dawkins
There is a recent book out from Bantam Press by a noted scientist and thinker Richard Dawkins that jumped as high as number 9 in the bestseller lists of The Wall Street Journal. His book is straightforward enough. His title: The God Delusion.
It is striking to me how things have changed. Madalyn Murray O’Hair was the leading atheist of my younger days. She was an outsider, obviously angry, more of a celebrity – who used effective lawsuits to remove prayer and Biblical readings from schools, but not really an establishment figure, indeed, she was called the most-hated woman in America by Life Magazine.
Dawkins, on the other hand, teaches at Oxford – it doesn’t get more establishment than that. He is praised for his prose for other books by The New York Times and featured on the BBC and C-SPAN, not as a quirky person, but as a leading scientist, an establishment thinker.
The attack on God is coming from the inside now. Dawkins asserts “the irrationality of a belief it God.” The book’s publicity says: “With rigor and wit, Dawkins examines God in all his forms, from the sex-obsessed tyrant of the Old Testament to the more benign (but still illogical) Celestial Watchmaker favored by some Enlightenment thinkers. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of a supreme being.”
In fairness, I have only read excerpts posted by BBC, so I don’t wish to misconstrue his full point and argument, but his book is gaining rave reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. Something is afoot. We are seeing a frontal assault on God, on the Bible and on religion in general.
Such an assault and book shouldn’t go unremarked. What might be a Mormon response?
You might counter some of his argument this way: In these excerpts, he says that religion causes people to do colossally mean things like 9-11 (religion can) However, religion has also caused people to do extraordinarily generous and simple good things like help the poor (religious people clearly give more to charity in the United States) or to helping people avoid cheating on their wives and being kind to children. Religious people tend to be happier, as well. Clearly religion had great impact on the philosophies that helped create the American Constitution and much of the great art in Western tradition, from Handel to Milton to Mozart and the Great Cathedrals.
You might also counter his arguments by noting the logical flaw girding what he says. As he pokes with anecdotes at some religions, he wishes to prove all religions false. Until he proves ALL religions false, one by one, he hasn’t proven his case. He is engaging in the hasty generalization.
A further danger in his presentation is the straw man. It seems to me that he is creating a false picture of what religion actually is in people’s lives. The straw man argument here is that if you create a false picture of religion and knock that false picture down, you can pretend to really be knocking down religion, when, in fact, you really aren’t.
You might further counter his arguments by noting that it isn’t just religion that produces the extremism that led to the suicide bombings. True, some religious belief can lead to that. He speaks of the Japanese Kamikaze almost off-handedly – by noting the contrast with the British Muslims who blew themselves up “these human bombs (the British Muslims) had no expectation that their bereaved families would be lionized, looked after or supported on martyrs' pensions.”
Does that make it somehow OK to blow yourself up if it isn’t for eternal glory but for temporal reasons? It is as though he is arguing that suicide bombers who use religion are irrational, and those who use temporal reasons are not. Thereby, he “proves” his case against religion. There is a circular quality to his argument.
However, when Dr. Dawkins talks of the weirdness of the Bible and the problems with organized religion, as a Mormon, we might gently note that he has some points. It was Joseph Smith who said we believe the Bible – as far as it is translated correctly. It is the Book of Mormon that teaches that plain and precious truths were lost. Furthermore, we have long argued that while our Christian friends have a form of godliness and many great religious leaders were important moral teachers, the world had descended into apostasy prior to the Restoration. The creeds of some Christianity are “an abomination,” we have taught. We say with care and respect, that we have more truth than other religions.
So while we take grave issue with Dawkins conclusions and his intent and his assault on our religious friends, we must admit there is something to some of his evidence -- on one level.
However, there are two points as a Latter-day Saint that I would make beyond all of this.
First, we have evidence to support our view that God is good and he lives and that evidence must be dealt with. It rests in the Book of Mormon.
I would challenge anyone to read it. Look at the depth of its philosophical teachings. Look at the power of its stories. Look at the clarity and consistency of its doctrine. Look at the sophistication of its structure. Look at its simplicity of prose and the density of its forms. Contrast this with the writings of, say, St. Augustine, or of, say even the analects of Confucius. I know of no other book that even pretends to be a history mixed with doctrine that is organized like a classic tragedy this way.
Even the writings of Tolkien, who, writing fiction, drew over decades from the best libraries of the world and the legends of ancient history, couldn’t quite develop a story focused on multiple generations, but, instead he focused on one, two if you include the Hobbit. Even if Joseph Smith said it was fiction, it would be remarkable. He claims it is a true ancient record, translated for a modern day, and that is where the evidence lies.
The Book of Mormon exists. There is little doubt based on the historical documents that Joseph Smith produced it in about 60 days with essentially no revision by straight dictation. He was a person with a third-grade education, and he did it at the beginning of his career – not the end. It is also clear that the book reads much differently than the prose of Joseph Smith. He would use words like nefarious rascality in his letters. You find nothing like that in the Book of Mormon. Accordingly, the difference in language suggests a man who translated a record not who made something up.
But there is further evidence. Eleven trusted men reported seeing the Gold plates (Imagine how well it would be in court if 11 trusted citizens said they saw a specific crime.) Others reported hefting and seeing the plates. Three said they saw the angel Joseph Smith talked about. That they later became disaffected with Joseph Smith during financial crises, but maintained their witness of the vision they had, suggests that their story was true, not from a place where someone had “brainwashed” them.
People who make it a part of their lives report being happier, more at peace, and more successful. I’ve certainly seen it change lives for the better. My own life has been enriched by it. And those who report this aren’t just yokels from the West. They include millions across the world from all walks of life including successful business people, successful educators and successful scientists of the highest credential.
And Joseph Smith gave his life for this book and the teachings that followed – while trying to save the lives of his followers. Contrast him with, say, David Koresh or Osama bin Laden, who let others do the dying with and for them. Joseph Smith was falsely accused and was shot by a mob, then jumping out a window, thereby saving two men with him, and thereby slowing the gathering storm around his people as well, who faced sinister mob violence. So if he was a fraudulent, sociopathic brainwasher, what explains the manner of his death?
Mormons, therefore, make a very serious challenge to the world. This is not some random challenge based on a quirky coincidence that many call forth to buttress their religion and their faith: “I was thinking about a guy and, you know what, I got a call the next day that he had been in an accident.” This might be ascribed to God or it might just as well be explained by randomness, as some mathematicians have pointed out. I am not talking about that.
I am talking about the rare either/or logical argument. Either Joseph told the truth about this book and all that followed, or he was a strange, but nevertheless, colossal fraud. (Or he was strangely delusional. But can we eliminate that already? Delusional people don’t produce books like the Book of Mormon.)
What I am saying is this: We say God in heaven sent an angel to Earth, told a boy where Golden Plates were. He translated those plates by the gift and power of God. This Book says Jesus died for the world and was resurrected. If you take the story as true, and I do, then what follows is that religion can be true and that God is in his heavens. It is no delusion. It also means that we will be judged for our own thoughts and actions as well.
So if you wish to prove Mormonism, so-called, wrong, start with explaining where the Book of Mormon came from. Joseph Smith just made it up? – Find someone else who has made up such a story with any significant impact while pretending it was true? Someone else did and he plagiarized it? Show us the source documents. Joseph’s claim is so bold, I know of no one else who has even made it, let alone successfully. If he is a fraud, he is the best the world has produced.
But beyond that is our second, and final, point.
Those who say God is a delusion rely on reason to do so. They call forth logical arguments.
But such isn’t really a fair way. You wouldn’t ask me to learn science without using the scientific method would you? I do use that method and reason profitably in my own work and research.
So to critique religion – and specifically what I would call the Gospel of Jesus Christ not Mormonism – without looking to its methods is also unfair, as unfair as critiquing science without using scientific method.
Religion and the Gospel cannot be settled by debate. Instead, you might look to gospel methods in determining the case for God. Reason can play a role, but it is not a determining role.
Instead, first, a person must have a desire to believe, to find out the truth. That person must let that work with them to begin to experiment. (Yes, experiment.)
The experiment is faith. Faith is often defined poorly as belief or a system of belief. Faith, the Book of Mormon teaches, is not just belief, but belief in something that is true. You plant it as a seed. If it grows, it must have some truth. If it doesn’t, a humble person moves on.
So, planting the seed is necessary. It involves humility.
Yes, a person must believe in God for God to let that idea grow of his existence and his attributes. What hubris it is to say, “I will believe in a Supreme Being if the Supreme Being, who lent me breath, shows himself to me.” It is similar hubris to say, “why would God do this or allow this?” Yes, suffering is complicated and powerful, but scriptures can and do provide answers to the questions of suffering, especially The Book of Mormon. (That is a question for another day.) Faith implies God has his purposes. It doesn’t imply blind obedience but constant seeking with humility for answers.
So, desire with humility begets belief, which begets the experiment, which begets faith, which leads to understanding and truth.
Read the Book of Mormon with an honest desire to know it is true. Ask God if it is not true. He can and will manifest the truth of it unto you.
I have seen much of the best the world has to offer. I have participated in discussions with leading intellectuals at great American universities, seen beautiful buildings, tasted great food prepared well, seen nature at its best and met many of the powerful.
Though I find God in some of those things, the Spirit of God that has come into my heart and mind as I have discovered and rediscovered this sublime book is different than all of those things, and far more powerful. I have followed this path of experiment. The seed bore real fruit. I cannot describe it fully, but just because I cannot doesn’t make it any less real.
I have experienced, through the great experiment, God as I read the Book of Mormon. Accordingly, I know there is a God without any delusion. Accordingly, I know there is a savior – Jesus Christ. There is eternal life. I’ll see my father again one day. There will be justice one day for the grave injustices of this world. This is no delusion.
Say what you will. I know what I know. God lives, without delusion.
Of course, my views should not be construed to represent anything other than my own views. They are NOT necessarily the views of my department, my university or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the sponsoring institution of my university.