Richard Dawkins says he is a Cultural Christian

[Sand Dancer]

I found this report on Dawkins, one of the world's most famous and antagonistic atheists, claiming to be a cultural Christian to be absolutely fascinating. I hope it will open up a discussion about what a cultural Christian is as opposed to a true believer, and why (perhaps) such a person would identify with Christianity as opposed to, say, Islam. Here are various quotes from two of many articles on it.

Atheist Richard Dawkins considers himself a ‘cultural Christian’

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”....

After expressing his satisfaction at what he perceives as a decline in the number of Christians, the famous atheist noted that he “would not be happy if, for example, we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches. So I call myself a cultural Christian and I think it would be truly dreadful if we substituted any alternative religion.”

‘I’m a cultural Christian’ says Richard Dawkins | Anglican Ink © 2024

“You know I love hymns and Christmas Carols. I feel at home in the Christian ethos. I feel that we are a Christian country in that sense”....

Dawkins’ version of atheism seems to have changed tack, and in a positive way, or at least in this interview. He has left behind the stinging attacks and is gently embracing the world that Christianity has provided....

...because secularism & Dawkins’ own brand of evangelical atheism are both expressions of a specifically Christian culture – as Dawkins himself, sitting on the branch he’s been sawing through and gazing nervously at the ground far below, seems to have begun to realise....

Richard Dawkins wants to keep the fruit of Christianity while rejecting the beliefs of Christianity....

Dawkins admits that the social good has an origins story and it is integrally tied to the Christian faith, although he is still unwilling to believe in the Divine. “There is a difference between being a believing Christian and a cultural Christian”.

Without believing, it's okay to think Jesus was a good role model in some ways, that The Golden Rule is a good idea, etc. I don't see anything shocking about that.

 

[Comradio251]

I found this report on Dawkins, one of the world's most famous and antagonistic atheists, claiming to be a cultural Christian to be absolutely fascinating. I hope it will open up a discussion about what a cultural Christian is as opposed to a true believer, and why (perhaps) such a person would identify with Christianity as opposed to, say, Islam. Here are various quotes from two of many articles on it.

Atheist Richard Dawkins considers himself a ‘cultural Christian’

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”....

After expressing his satisfaction at what he perceives as a decline in the number of Christians, the famous atheist noted that he “would not be happy if, for example, we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches. So I call myself a cultural Christian and I think it would be truly dreadful if we substituted any alternative religion.”

‘I’m a cultural Christian’ says Richard Dawkins | Anglican Ink © 2024

“You know I love hymns and Christmas Carols. I feel at home in the Christian ethos. I feel that we are a Christian country in that sense”....

Dawkins’ version of atheism seems to have changed tack, and in a positive way, or at least in this interview. He has left behind the stinging attacks and is gently embracing the world that Christianity has provided....

...because secularism & Dawkins’ own brand of evangelical atheism are both expressions of a specifically Christian culture – as Dawkins himself, sitting on the branch he’s been sawing through and gazing nervously at the ground far below, seems to have begun to realise....

Richard Dawkins wants to keep the fruit of Christianity while rejecting the beliefs of Christianity....

Dawkins admits that the social good has an origins story and it is integrally tied to the Christian faith, although he is still unwilling to believe in the Divine. “There is a difference between being a believing Christian and a cultural Christian”.

It's too bad Dawkins made a horrible excuse for not debating William Lane Craig. Although, the two did meet face to face once off camera at a debate in Mexico.

 

[Augustus]

I found this report on Dawkins, one of the world's most famous and antagonistic atheists, claiming to be a cultural Christian to be absolutely fascinating. I hope it will open up a discussion about what a cultural Christian is as opposed to a true believer, and why (perhaps) such a person would identify with Christianity as opposed to, say, Islam. Here are various quotes from two of many articles on it.

Atheist Richard Dawkins considers himself a ‘cultural Christian’

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”....

After expressing his satisfaction at what he perceives as a decline in the number of Christians, the famous atheist noted that he “would not be happy if, for example, we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches. So I call myself a cultural Christian and I think it would be truly dreadful if we substituted any alternative religion.”

‘I’m a cultural Christian’ says Richard Dawkins | Anglican Ink © 2024

“You know I love hymns and Christmas Carols. I feel at home in the Christian ethos. I feel that we are a Christian country in that sense”....

Dawkins’ version of atheism seems to have changed tack, and in a positive way, or at least in this interview. He has left behind the stinging attacks and is gently embracing the world that Christianity has provided....

...because secularism & Dawkins’ own brand of evangelical atheism are both expressions of a specifically Christian culture – as Dawkins himself, sitting on the branch he’s been sawing through and gazing nervously at the ground far below, seems to have begun to realise....

Richard Dawkins wants to keep the fruit of Christianity while rejecting the beliefs of Christianity....

Dawkins admits that the social good has an origins story and it is integrally tied to the Christian faith, although he is still unwilling to believe in the Divine. “There is a difference between being a believing Christian and a cultural Christian”.

Secular Humanism is pretty much a godless version of liberal Protestantism.

Its evolution is pretty easy to trace from the dissenting traditions via Providential Deism to the modern Humanist worldview.

For me, it’s more interesting that many Humanists feel the need to insist that their belief system is somehow a radical rejection of Christian culture and worldview.

 

[Quintessence]

Secular Humanism is pretty much a godless version of liberal Protestantism.

Its evolution is pretty easy to trace from the dissenting traditions via Providential Deism to the modern Humanist worldview.

For me, it’s more interesting that many Humanists feel the need to insist that their belief system is somehow a radical rejection of Christian culture and worldview.

It's not too surprising when we consider the proccess of deconversion from one lifeway and the beginning of another. In finding oneself, it is not uncommon to begin by defining oneself on the basis of what one is not. Only later does one get to defining one's new lifeway based on what one is. And with the Christian hegemony, most of us start with defining our new lifeway in opposition to (or as rejection of) Christianity. I see the same thing within the contemporary Pagan community quite often, as most of us were raised in some sort of Christian tradition. In time, as our paths mature, many grow out of this. Some, though, never do. Such is the way of things.

 

[Estro Felino]

Secular Humanism is pretty much a godless version of liberal Protestantism.

Its evolution is pretty easy to trace from the dissenting traditions via Providential Deism to the modern Humanist worldview.

For me, it’s more interesting that many Humanists feel the need to insist that their belief system is somehow a radical rejection of Christian culture and worldview.

Perfectly said.

 

[Mock Turtle]

He even dismissed the sexual abuse he suffered as part of that Christian education as not that big a deal.

Richard Dawkins defends "mild pedophilia," says it does not cause "lasting harm"

The biologist and author described the sexual abuse that occurred among his former classmates as "mild touching up"

www.salon.com

Stephen Fry in one of his books also seemingly dismissed his sexual abuse by an older boy (at school) - perhaps because he was actually gay.

 

[metis]

Without believing, it's okay to think Jesus was a good role model in some ways, that The Golden Rule is a good idea, etc. I don't see anything shocking about that.

I guess that I also am more of a "cultural Christian" for much for the same reason with my Spinosa-like approach. As a matter of fact, I have long admired the basic Buddhist approach.

 

[Tinker Grey]

MSN

www.msn.com

I find that I like to live in a culturally Christian country, although I do not believe a single word of the Christian faith.

{Emphasis added}

It's true that statistically, the number of people who actually believe in Christianity is going down and I'm happy with that

That said, the fact that he likes his culture is pretty unremarkable.

 

[John D. Brey]

Dawkins’ version of atheism seems to have changed tack, and in a positive way, or at least in this interview. He has left behind the stinging attacks and is gently embracing the world that Christianity has provided....

I have, and have read, most of Dawkins' books. I've never heard him express anything like he does in this article. Nevertheless, knowing he's extremely thoughtful and intelligent, I always thought he might come this way. I wouldn't even be too surprised if he actually converted some day.

One of the things interesting about the context of Dawkins' statement is his clear understanding about the fact that a "Christian culture" produces an environment he would "choose every time." I strongly believe that if Dawkins fully understood what the world would be like without Judaism and Christianity, he, like most everyone else, would come to appreciate that Jews and Christians are something like a beachhead where divine Spirit lands in order to battle the forces of decay and death that roam the world like a roaring lion. Many atheists take so much of the freedom and prosperity they possess for granted not knowing its true source, its true price, nor, more importantly, its everlasting pedigree.

Though Dawkins appreciates the more mundane and humanistic affects of a Judeo/Christian culture, he's completely, or seemingly so, blind to the deeper things which, if he saw them, would turn his epistemology upside down and inside out. Pray for the Holy Spirit to open his eyes. Imagine what a message it would send if he, like many rabid atheists of the past (say St. Augustine, or more recently Anthony Flew), finally gives in to the truth any of us ignores or denies at our peril.

Accordingly I turned my attention to the holy scriptures to find out what they were like. What I see in them today is something not accessible to the scrutiny of the proud nor exposed to the gaze of the immature, something veiled in mystery. At that time, though, I was in no state to enter, nor prepared to bow my head and accommodate myself to its ways. My approach then was quite different from the one I am suggesting now: when I studied the Bible and compared it with Cicero's dignified prose, it seemed to me unworthy. My swollen pride recoiled from its style and my intelligence failed to penetrate to its inner meaning. Scripture is a reality that grows along with little children, but I disdained to be a little child and in my high-and-mighty arrogance regarded myself as grown up.​

​

Saint Augustine, Confessions.​

John

 

[Rational Agnostic]

... because he's been losing support among atheists, IMO.

His anti-feminism stance turned a lot of people off of him a decade ago. More recently, his anti-trans stance is alienating him to even more people... but might endear him to a segment of Christianity.

IMO, that's what's happening. He's looking for a place to be islamophobic, misogynist and anti-trans, so he's turned toward Christianity.

Can you explain precisely *how* he is anti-feminist, anti-trans, and Islamophobic, or do you just enjoy throwing these words around when someone uses facts and logic to come to conclusions that you don't like?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Can you explain precisely *how* he is anti-feminist, anti-trans, and Islamophobic,

Let's start with Elevatorgate. I assume if you've got Dawkins in your avatar, you've at least heard of it, but the short version: when women in the skeptic community spoke out about how harassment from men was turning them away from the movement, he sided with the harassers.

As for being anti-trans, the American Humanist Association actually revoked the "Humanist of the Year" award they had given him after a string of public anti-trans comments:

Richard Dawkins loses ‘humanist of the year’ title over trans comments

American Humanist Association criticises academic for comments about identity using ‘the guise of scientific discourse’, and withdraws its 1996 honour

www.theguardian.com

As far as his Islamophobic attitudes, his twitter feed is full of nonsense like this:

Richard Dawkins accused of Islamophobia after comparing 'lovely church bells' to 'aggressive-sounding Allahu Akhbar'

Renowned author and strident atheist called 'tedious old racist'

www.independent.co.uk

or do you just enjoy throwing these words around when someone uses facts and logic to come to conclusions that you don't like?

Do you jump to the conclusion that someone else's opinion must be unfounded just because you disagree with them? Give your head a shake and reflect on your prejudices.

 

[Graeme855]

I found this report on Dawkins, one of the world's most famous and antagonistic atheists, claiming to be a cultural Christian to be absolutely fascinating. I hope it will open up a discussion about what a cultural Christian is as opposed to a true believer, and why (perhaps) such a person would identify with Christianity as opposed to, say, Islam. Here are various quotes from two of many articles on it.

Atheist Richard Dawkins considers himself a ‘cultural Christian’

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Atheist Richard Dawkins said of Christianity: “It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that I think Islam is not.”....

After expressing his satisfaction at what he perceives as a decline in the number of Christians, the famous atheist noted that he “would not be happy if, for example, we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches. So I call myself a cultural Christian and I think it would be truly dreadful if we substituted any alternative religion.”

‘I’m a cultural Christian’ says Richard Dawkins | Anglican Ink © 2024

“You know I love hymns and Christmas Carols. I feel at home in the Christian ethos. I feel that we are a Christian country in that sense”....

Dawkins’ version of atheism seems to have changed tack, and in a positive way, or at least in this interview. He has left behind the stinging attacks and is gently embracing the world that Christianity has provided....

...because secularism & Dawkins’ own brand of evangelical atheism are both expressions of a specifically Christian culture – as Dawkins himself, sitting on the branch he’s been sawing through and gazing nervously at the ground far below, seems to have begun to realise....

Richard Dawkins wants to keep the fruit of Christianity while rejecting the beliefs of Christianity....

Dawkins admits that the social good has an origins story and it is integrally tied to the Christian faith, although he is still unwilling to believe in the Divine. “There is a difference between being a believing Christian and a cultural Christian”.

Is it possible for Dawkins to be a "cultural Christian" while saying that he doesn't believe anything in the bible?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is it possible for Dawkins to be a "cultural Christian" while saying that he doesn't believe anything in the bible?

I would say so. There's a lot to Christianity besides Jesus, God and the Bible.

For instance, a couple posts back I posted a link to Dawkins expressing (in a rather xenophobic way, but regardless) a fondness for church bells. I've heard ex-Christians talk about how they miss things like strawberry socials. Around here in the fall, there's a sort of "turkey dinner circuit" where churches take turns doing turkey dinners in their church halls as fundraisers.

All that can be seen as part of Christianity and none of it requires any particular beliefs.

 

[Rival]

Is it possible for Dawkins to be a "cultural Christian" while saying that he doesn't believe anything in the bible?

Of course.

There have been cultural Christians since the 18thc.

It just means they acknowledge their moral and political foundations have their roots in Christianity, alongside most of their culture, literature, song, art etc. and are part of that culture. You can't really not be a cultural Christian if you're Western.

The same way you can be a secular Jew or a cultural Muslim who may not believe the Quran but doesn't eat blood or drink wine.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Of course.

There have been cultural Christians since the 18thc.

I'm not sure why this is hard to grasp; it just means they acknowledge their moral and political foundations have their roots in Christianity, alongside most of their culture, literature, song, art etc. and are part of that culture. You can't really not be a cultural Christian if you're Western.

The same way you can be a secular Jew or a cultural Muslim who may not believe the Quran but doesn't eat blood or drink wine.

I'm not sure I'd go as far to say that every western person is a cultural Christian.

That being said, there are plenty of people who celebrate "de-Godified" versions of Christian holidays like Christmas and Easter and who think churches are pretty but don't adhere to the religious tenets of Christianity.

 

[John D. Brey]

Is it possible for Dawkins to be a "cultural Christian" while saying that he doesn't believe anything in the bible?

So great has been the impact of Christianity on Western culture that there's a genuine historical sense in which the entire world now is culturally Christian. The most dominant cultural force of the last century has been the most rabidly Christian culture on the planet, the USA. What the eminent historian Will Durant said about Christianity's defeat of the Roman Empire, now applies equally to Christian culture overtaking the entire world:

There is no greater drama in human record than the sight of a few Christians, scorned or oppressed by a succession of emperors, bearing all trials with a fierce tenacity, multiplying quietly, building order while their enemies generated chaos, fighting the sword with the word, brutality with hope, and at last defeating the strongest state that history has known. Caesar and Christ had met in the arena, and Christ had won.​

​

Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Vol. 3, p. 65.​

There's a movie at the theaters right now, Cabrini, showing a near perfect example of Durant's statement in action. It's the true story of a penniless nun who moves from Italy to NYC to start a worldwide outreach feeding, clothing, and humanizing, the most disenfranchised members of society.



John

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Is it possible for Dawkins to be a "cultural Christian" while saying that he doesn't believe anything in the bible?

Yes.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Let's start with Elevatorgate. I assume if you've got Dawkins in your avatar, you've at least heard of it, but the short version: when women in the skeptic community spoke out about how harassment from men was turning them away from the movement, he sided with the harassers.

As for being anti-trans, the American Humanist Association actually revoked the "Humanist of the Year" award they had given him after a string of public anti-trans comments:

Richard Dawkins loses ‘humanist of the year’ title over trans comments

American Humanist Association criticises academic for comments about identity using ‘the guise of scientific discourse’, and withdraws its 1996 honour

www.theguardian.com

As far as his Islamophobic attitudes, his twitter feed is full of nonsense like this:

Richard Dawkins accused of Islamophobia after comparing 'lovely church bells' to 'aggressive-sounding Allahu Akhbar'

Renowned author and strident atheist called 'tedious old racist'

www.independent.co.uk

Do you jump to the conclusion that someone else's opinion must be unfounded just because you disagree with them? Give your head a shake and reflect on your prejudices.

You still didn't explain precisely *how* these statements make him a misogynist, islamophobe, or anti-trans and didn't give any reasoning for why you think he was wrong on these things. For example, I tend to agree that hearing church bells is more pleasant than hearing an aggressive call of "Allahu Akbar" so I think he definitely got that one right. Which statements of his specifically do you think were wrong and *why* do you think they were wrong?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You still didn't explain precisely *how* these statements make him a misogynist, islamophobe, or anti-trans and didn't give any reasoning for why you think he was wrong on these things. For example, I tend to agree that hearing church bells is more pleasant than hearing an aggressive call of "Allahu Akbar" so I think he definitely got that one right. Which statements of his specifically do you think were wrong and *why* do you think they were wrong?

I think I'm done with your sealioning. You have enough information to draw reasonable conclusions if you want to.

 

[Augustus]

The same way you can be a secular Jew or a cultural Muslim who may not believe the Quran but doesn't eat blood or drink wine.

I always remember one of my friends fasting during Ramadan and then breaking the fast with crispy pork and a cocktail

I always imagine an Angel on the day of reckoning trying to work out which column to put this into…