Chp 7 – The God Delusion – The “Good” book and the changing moral zeitgeist – my initial thoughts

A wonderful chapter with lots of thought provoking points. 

In this chapter Professor Dawkins makes the very strong case that “we do not, as a matter of fact, derive our morals from scripture.” As for “scripture” Professor Dawkins is referring to the Old Testament and the New Testament. Professor Dawkins provides ample examples of references in the Bible which simply cannot be taken literally otherwise to do so would in today’s thinking be absurd and even if we are to assume such passages are not to be taken literally it is unclear what the moral/lesson of such passages are.  Professor Dawkins makes the point that believers in scripture pick and choose which parts of the Bible to follow and sums up his point by saying “Do those people who hold up the Bible as an inspiration to moral rectitude have the slightest notion of what is actually written in it?”

I noted with interest that Professor Dawkins does not refer to the Quran and I would certainly like him to do a similar analysis of the Quran as he has done of the Bible.  Indeed, I think Professor Dawkins would find that the Quran has a better pedigree and authenticity (compared to the Bible) as there is certainly much less debate about the authenticity of the Quran. Moreover, he will not find the same amount of parables open to question. I think this will come as a genuine surprise to Professor Dawkins. Indeed, I must admit before I knew anything about Islam I simply assumed it must be “hocus pocus” and full of nonsense. My first (and sincere) reading of the Quran dispelled this view at once.

Professor Dawkins expresses concern at the chief concern of the “scripture” God being other gods to rival him. Certainly, in Islam, this is the same insofar as the worship of gods other than Allah (known as shirk) is the worst sin. Professor Dawkins considers this petty but I can understand this insomuch as if we think of ourselves doing something for others and then such others thank another person for our good deeds we wouldn’t be happy! Also, again, if we were to assume that there is a God, he would be more offended I guess by actions against him compared to actions against others because God is able to make good our misdeeds between ourselves but what of when we offend God?  If you indulge me and assume there is a God, that he made the Earth a habitable place for us, he made the laws of physics, chemistry, made our bodies, provided us with food etc. shouldn’t we be grateful? If you did this for someone wouldn’t you be upset if that someone showed no thanks?

I was not impressed that the only references to Islam were three references to the Taliban and two to Saudi Arabia. With regard to the Taliban, this label is really not what Islam is about and I would imagine it was thrown in as it evokes images of savagery and ignorance which really isn’t what Islam is about. As for the reference to Saudi Arabia, there was never an idea to bulldoze Mecca, certainly, there is ongoing construction to accommodate ever growing numbers of pilgrims. With regard to the Saudi attitude to women, again, there is a fuller discussion to be had about women’s rights in Islam that goes beyond a casual reference to Saudi Arabia.

Returning to Professor Dawkins’ main theme in this chapter, that we shouldn’t and in fact do not get morals from the Old Testament and the New Testament, I think he is dead right about this.  Professor Dawkins mentions the harshness of Jesus supposedly advising his disciples to abandon their families (this is opposite to Islamic values) and the absurdity of “original sin” (again, totally contrary to Islamic values whereby each person is only responsible for his own actions). In Islam we consider these aspects a corruption to the original teachings (indeed Professor Dawkins earlier in his book notes the lack of pedigree of today’s Bible as an accurate record of the teachings of Jesus).

I very much liked Professor Dawkins’ observation that there is a consensus as to what we consider right and wrong. In Islam this is explained by the term “fitrah” which essentially means that we are all pre-programmed to believe and have a sense of right and wrong. 

I also thought that Professor Dawkins comments about the shifting zeitgeist (spirit of times) were well made, interesting and thought provoking.  Certainly, I have witnessed in my time a shift in what we think of as good and bad. In this regard, I would also add the shifting in views of “Islam” and how the religion of Islam seems to be persistently defined without reference to the Quran or the vast majority of sincerely practicing Muslims. Indeed, I find it odd that a religion I see is based on peace and being gentle, charitable and considerate to others is continuously defined in the media by the actions of thugs who I doubt are sincere believers. 

I also liked Professor Dawkins’ comment that religious labels are often used in conflicts however the true underlying reason for such conflict isn’t necessarily religion (i.e. Northern Ireland).  I honestly don’t believe that religion is the cause of wars and conflicts – I would say that humans have a tendency for conflict and will find any area of difference to start conflict. We don’t only have religious, national and regional rivalries we also have local ones that can even pit town against town, village against village and even street against street.

I have one further thought from the previous chapter. Professor Dawkins examined whether people are good because of religion. From my experience of living and working in the Middle East, I would say that from my experience, the place where I have lived in the Middle East has stronger family values, stronger moral values than in my home country of the UK. I would put this down to belief in Islam. To give a sense of this – you can safely walk in a park in my home in the Middle East with very very little fear of attack. I would not say the same is true of the UK. Also, in the UK, the older generations can talk of a time when you could go outside and leave your house unlocked with little fear of being burgled. Again, the place where I live in the Middle East is more like that and I would put that down to the religion of Islam. A final example, alcohol. Obviously, in the West, it isn’t immoral to drink alcohol but it is immoral in Islamic countries. Which is right? I remember in my early days as a lawyer conducting work experience in a magistrates court in the UK – to my horror I discovered that most of the criminal cases heard on Mondays related to drink related offences occurring during the previous weekend. How many of the accident and emergency cases in hospitals on a Friday night are drink related? Ever noticed that menacing gang of youths hanging out around off licences? I never saw any of this where I live in the Middle East. I will leave it to the reader to decide for themselves which is good and bad.