An interview with Richard Dawkins on Beliefnet

An interesting interview of Richard Dawkins is available on Beliefnet. I took note of a few points he makes. In regards to many Christians understanding of evolution he says:

They need to understand what evolution is about. Many of them don’t. I was truly shocked to be told by two separate religious leaders in this country [the U.S.] a few weeks ago--they both said something to the effect that, “I’ll believe in evolution when I see a tailed monkey give birth to a human.”

That is staggering ignorance of what evolutionary science is about; if they think that’s what evolutionists believe, no wonder they’re skeptical of it. How can a civilized country have adult people in positions of leadership who know so stunningly little about the leading biological concept?

This is half the problem. So many Christians have so little real understanding of what evolution is really all about. They don’t understand it, write it off as ‘false teaching’, denounce it with zeal, and often question the ‘Christianity’ of those Christians who believe in it.

Is atheism the logical extension of believing in evolution?

They clearly can’t be irrevocably linked because a very large number of theologians believe in evolution. In fact, any respectable theologian of the Catholic or Anglican or any other sensible church believes in evolution. Similarly, a very large number of evolutionary scientists are also religious. My personal feeling is that understanding evolution led me to atheism.

It’s nice to know that one of the world’s most outspoken atheists can recognize that atheism is not the ‘logical extension’ of evolution. Why can’t so many churchmen recognize the same thing? Evolution doesn’t in itself cause atheism. Many atheists today would be atheists anyway in spite of evolution. Honestly, one of the biggest causes of atheism in folks today is probably the stubbornness of so many churchmen who will not let go of their human interpretations of the Bible, despite mounting evidence that they are wrong.

You talk about how your words have been twisted by religious people in the past. Which words of yours have been twisted?

Whenever I begin an argument by saying something that sounds as though it's creationist, something like "the Cambrian Explosion is a sudden explosion of fossils almost as though they had no history," I'm obviously saying that as a prelude to explaining why.

But these people quote selectively. It's a demonstration of their fundamental dishonesty. They’re not actually interested in truth, they’re interested in propaganda. [italics are mine]

Unfortunately, I have found this to be true in several instances. It is so sad to see Christians stoop to this level. When seen for what it is this kind of deceitful propagandizing has caused many to lose faith in Christ.