A Review of the God Delusion (Part 18)
Gehenna
Twelve pages of the ninth chapter are filled with Dawkins' objections to the Bible doctrine of hell—and especially that it is taught to children. Probably, most people would agree that the concept of hell should not be overly emphasized or be presented in the most graphic of terms to small children. But let's ask the question first: "Why do Christians teach about something so negative as hell, describing it as a place of eternal torment?"
Many people think that hell runs contrary to the concept of God. If He is supposed to be a God of love, mercy, grace, and compassion, then how could He torment the human beings of His creation—who were made in His own image? Is God bi-polar—nice one day and nasty the next? No. Those who object to the doctrine of hell do not understand God.
God is infinite in all His attributes. God is love as well as all those other attributes we like to think of, but He is first of all holy. No one can read Exodus and Leviticus without picking up on this facet of God's character. The ground upon which Moses stood was deemed holy (Ex. 3:5). The Sabbath day was to be kept holy (Ex. 20:8). The mercy seat was placed in the most holy place (Ex. 26:34). Aaron, as a priest of the Holy God, was to wear holy garments (Ex. 28:4). The very crown in the turban on his head was regarded as holy (Ex. 29:6). Many other items are described as holy.
Leviticus continues in the same vein, with one important addition. In Leviticus 19:2, we read that Moses was to say to the congregation: "You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy." This principle is so important that it is repeated in the New Testament (1 Peter 1:15-16). The word holy appears more than 600 times in the Bible—almost twice as much as the word love. No, the intent in pointing this fact out is not to minimize love—but to give holiness its proper consideration. It is the only characteristic of God that is repeated three times in one verse. "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory" (Isa. 6:3).
So, what does all this mean? God is holy and therefore cannot mix and mingle with sin, wickedness, corruption, and the like. He must live apart from all iniquity; it cannot be allowed to taint His dwelling place, heaven. "But all human beings have sinned. Doesn't that mean that no one can enter heaven?" Yes, it would mean exactly that if God had not found a way to cleanse human beings, but He did.
He is just to punish the disobedient because He gave everyone free will. And we all chose to sin and are worthy of punishment. But it is at this point that His grace, love, and mercy enter in to help us out. If we are cleansed and made holy, then God can fellowship us once again and live with Him in heaven.
"But how are we cleansed?" The answer is that we are washed from our sins in Jesus' blood (Rev. 1:5) when we are baptized for the forgiveness of our sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16). Having been cleansed and made holy, we can abide with Him eternally.
What is ironic is that Dawkins does not think sin is that bad, that God is that holy, that He possesses so much love, that He gave us free will, or that blood should be used to cleanse us. Isn't the reader glad that Dawkins is not in charge of the universe?
When the angels rebelled against God, He created hell (Gehenna) for the devil and His angels (Matt. 25:41). Why? The answer is that they dwelt with Him in a heavenly abode but were dissatisfied. Well, okay. Another realm was created for them where God's presence did not dwell, and according to His perfect justice, they were confined to that region (Tartarus).
After man was created, and he chose to rebel, it would not have served justice to let him into heaven. He did not like God's commandments; so upon death God assigned man to the only other place that existed, the permanent place being called Gehenna. And this answers the question of why Christians speak of hell. Shall we not warn people of what lies ahead? Everyone is either cleansed and made holy or they remain in their sins and are punished.
"But does hell need to be described in such graphic terms?" Okay, what is heaven? It's the place where God dwells, free of corruption. What, then, is hell? It is the place where God does not dwell. His presence and His goodness and wonderful blessings are absent. There is only sin, rebellion, hatred, anger, and punishment. How can we describe it in terms human beings understand it?
One of the worst things is fire. Human beings respect fire and keep away from it when it blazes out of control; fire communicates, to some degree, the pain involved in the absence of God's blessings. What else terrifies people? Darkness. The darkness of a moonlit night may not frighten us, but total or thick darkness does. The important thing is that we comprehend how horrible not being in heaven will be. No one in his right mind would want to be in a lake of fire forever. Thus, the Scriptures warn us in order to prevent us from going there.
This is the way God ordered the spiritual universe. God warns us of the severe punishment sin receives. Parents warn their children not to do certain things (like play in the street or go swimming alone). They do not want their children to suffer. God feels the same way. Sin merits punishment; there can be no other way. The only humane thing to do is to warn people of the penalty for disobedience (and the rewards of obedience). Despite worldly corruptions, holiness will prevail.
Education
As chapter nine continues, Dawkins continues to object to parents being responsible for their children. He takes issue with the 1972 Supreme Court Case, Wisconsin verses Yoder. Of all things, the Amish were allowed "to educate their own children in their own way…" (370-71). Horrors! He cannot understand why people don't know better. The government school could do such a better job of educating the nation's children, he thinks. Hah! This writer, as a former substitute teacher, has a feel for what is occurring in the government schools, and quite often there is not much education. Yes, some teachers remain dedicated and do an excellent work in teaching and inspiring students, but many do not.
And who is designing curricula? On February 11, 2025, in the Orlando area, it was Mental Health Day, in which students were asked various questions on an evaluation test. One question was, "If your grades are not high enough, what should you do?" One student answered, "I should study more and work harder." Wrong! The correct response was, "Nobody's perfect." While that statement is certainly true, in this context, it removes the motivation of a student to do better. "Nobody's perfect; so, I should be satisfied with C's and D's." (They probably won't flunk anyone.) Is it any wonder that many Christian parents are home schooling or sending their children to private schools?
Dawkins cannot help but being sarcastic as he chastises the Amish (Weird Al is funnier in his "Amish Paradise"). He writes:
The rest of us are happy with our cars and computers, our vaccines and antibiotics. But you quaint little people with your bonnets and your breeches, your horse buggies, your archaic dialect and your earth-closet privies, you enrich our lives (372).
Not content with castigating the Amish, Dawkins next picks a fight with Tony Blair, who was once Prime Minister of England. Blair had the temerity to offer a government subsidy to Emmanuel College, a school that was teaching "literal Biblical creationism" (372). Double horrors! Of all the nerve! Some at this institution actually dispute "the scientific evidence for evolution" (373). Do they? If the evidence is scientific, how could it be disputed. Is it possible that it was the evidence for the theory of evolution that was disputed? Might it have been pointed out that dating techniques are based on the theory of uniformitarianism? If so, the occurrence of the Flood would dispute those claims.
Whether Dawkins wants to admit it or not, there are serious challenges to evolution—to the Carbon dating process used on anything more than 11,000 years old. Also, polystrate fossils—once erroneously used by Lyell to challenge the concept of Creation—are now something that evolutionists find hard to explain. How ironic that most scientists once held a view toward them that is now totally different. How many students learn that?
Noah's Ark
As expected, Dawkins takes issue with the impact that the Flood had on the world. He does not care for Morris and Whitcomb—or anyone else who describes what he calls Flood Theology. The earth was not only affected by the rain that fell from the sky; "all the fountains of the great deep were broken up," also. South America may have broken off of Africa a great deal faster than "the speed with which fingernails grow" (376).
One point of interest in the book is that Dawkins does believe that a knowledge of the Bible should be part of a student's education because "it is a major source book for literary culture" (383). And he lists two pages full of quotes, people, and events that are alluded to in literature. Of course, he also thinks that knowing Greek and Roman mythology should be taught for the same reason. Still, it is encouraging that he sees some value in the Scriptures.
The Final Chapter
Chapter ten ends the book in rather a bizarre fashion. It begins with a reference to Binker, a childhood imaginary friend of A. A. Milne, author of Winnie the Pooh. The idea is that man has dreamed up God for his imaginary friend—for consolation in times of trouble. The analogy does not work very well because Binker, unlike God, is not holy, nor does he give commandments for our own good (Deut. 10:12-13). He is only available for soothing purposes. If man had invented God, His sole function would probably be to console a person in time of trouble. And while God does do that, there is a whole lot more to Him.
The main point Dawkins tries to make here is that, even if the thought of God consoles people in death, that doesn't prove that religion is true. This observation is accurate. Muslim terrorists, for example, may be comforted with the thought of 72 virgins, but that does not make it true. Not everyone, however, is comforted by believing in the existence of God at death. It is reported that W.C. Fields was not expected to live, and he was reading the Bible when a friend came to visit. Knowing that Fields had never been religious, he asked him what he was doing with the Bible. Reportedly, he answered in his characteristic manner, "Looking for loopholes."
Although the last article will examine purpose in life, for now it is simply pointed out that the final pages of the book are devoted to fantasy—parallel universes, dogs smelling in color, and this affirmation: "Not a single atom that is in your body today was there when that event took place" (quoting Steve Grand in Creation: Life and How to Make It, pages 515-16). Flew tried this ploy in his debate with Brother Warren. To paraphrase Warren's reply, in light of the "atom" observation, we might say, "I suppose that it wasn't really Dawkins that wrote The God Delusion (since it was 19 years ago in 2006). All prisoners should, on that basis, be released immediately; after all, their atoms change. Marriages should be null and void, also, once all the couple's original atoms are gone. Buzz.