Christian Love & Tolerance: Baptist Burns Richard Dawkins in Effigy
On February 1st, some psychotic delusionals of the Baptist fundamentalist variety held a mock funeral for Richard Dawkins. During the service, Dawkins was admonished to repent to the lord or that he will burn for all eternity. He was then condemned for his disbelief, immediately before an effigy of Dawkins was set in flames by the speaker (appropriately named “The King of Terrors”), who yelled out that Dawkins would fry!! as he set the match.
Source: The Frame Problem
It is legitimate, orthodox Christian doctrine that a person who disbelieves in the Christian god will burn and suffer in hell for all eternity. It is a legitimate, orthodox Christian doctrine that the only way to avoid an eternity of torment is to repent and become a Christian. There is nothing in Christian doctrine about burning a person in effigy to graphically depict what awaits atheists who don't repent, so while it's not required it also isn't condemned.
Most fair and moral adults should be repelled by this action, though, because of its implicitly violent message. This, however, is part of what atheist critics focus on: implicitly and explicitly violent, immoral, and repellent aspects of many religious doctrines. It is also these doctrines which are far more intolerant than anything taught or recommended by any atheists:
What this video (as well as the earlier video that advertised the funeral) does is say that Richard Dawkins is evil because of his outspoken atheism and criticism of religious faith. Through the concept of God, it says that for Dawkins’ atheism, his outspoken atheism, and his public criticism of religion, he deserves eternal punishment and condemnation in the form of eternal separation from all that is good, and subjugation to an eternity in a burning hell.
The video is not against Dawkins for the sake of being against Dawkins; it’s against Dawkins because Dawkins is an atheist, and is outspoken in his atheism and criticism toward religion. So what this video is saying is that atheism, the defense and encouragement of atheism, and the criticism and encouragement of criticism of religion are all evil and deserving of eternal punishment and condemnation in the form of eternal separation from all that is good (i.e., from the supposed kingdom of God), and an eternity in hell.
No atheists to my knowledge, and certainly not any of the prominent "new" atheist authors, have ever said anything remotely similar about religious believers. If atheists are "intolerant" for their pointed criticism of religion, I don't think we have any words strong enough to describe the intolerant attitude being expressed here — and remember, this is orthodox Christianity rather than some fringe extremism. If anything would be "extremist" here, it's the fact that the person in question takes these doctrines seriously while liberal and moderate Christians either deny or just try to ignore them.
Comments
If effigies are seen as legitimate forms of expression by these theists, then burning an effigy of a bearded guy in a white robe, with a crown of thorns perhaps, should be fair game. Though I’d be surprised if they saw it that way. At least in this case, no real individual would need to fear for their life.
I wish I could say that this is surprising, but it is fairly typical of true believers. This is why Faith should not be sheltered from criticism:
http://www.disillusionedwords.com/?p=30
“There is nothing in Christian doctrine about burning a person in effigy to graphically depict what awaits atheists who don’t repent, so while it’s not required it also isn’t condemned.”
Argument from silence.
Pointing out that something is not condemned in Christian doctrine is not an “argument” of any sort, much less an “argument from silence.” Pointing out that Christians who perform this action are not violating any prohibitions is also not an argument. It’s simply pointing out a fact.
You need to understand what arguments are and are not before you can try to identify logical fallacies in arguments.
Please. Your tactic of “pointing out” is a tactic that is pointed out as a backdoor means in every logic course and debate team across the world. It is a passive means of getting the audiance to draw a conclusion via invalid means. Its naughty.
What purpose does the statement serve other then as a backdoor attack on the Bible. Of course the Bible doesn’t directly condemn burning effigies. It does directly command Christians to love their neighbors and to love their enemies. All actions that are inconsistent with these acts of love are actions against the teaching of Scripture. Every Christian that I know would condemn these acts as inconsistent with Scripture and with the attitudes of followers of Christ. They are akin to those nuts who like to protest at the funerals of American soldiers. These groups do not represent mainstream orthodoxy.
I went to the website of these guys to discover that they claim all of 103 registered users…hardly a representation of orthodox christianity!
There is nothing the least bit illegitimate in pointing out that people are not engaged in behavior which their religion directly condemns. I’m not trying to get anyone to draw any conclusions other than the obvious: that the behavior in question is not contrary to traditional Christian doctrine. Some people may interpret certain doctrines as prohibiting such behavior, but others make equally legitimate interpretations that come to a different conclusion.
Since the Bible is not mentioned, this not any sort of attack on the Bible.
Of course, Christians have managed to convince themselves that even torture and execution are consistent with loving one’s enemies, so burning a person in effigy — which naturally causes far less harm — can’t be regarded as posing much of a problem.
Well, perhaps you just need to expand the scope of Christians you know. The blatant hate, bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination which I and others consistently experience with Christians isn’t too far from burning a person in effigy.
Jason, are you changing your name and email address to give the false impression that more than one person is here supporting your viewpoint?
As someone who tries to present themselves as though they are familiar with logic and fallacies, you should know that the size of a group is irrelevant. The question of whether burning someone in effigy directly contradicts orthodox Christian doctrine cannot be answered by counting how many Christians happen to be doing it right now.
Does anyone else think this sort of serves the function of the Old Western coyote head on the fence to the community’s atheists and other non-Christians? In other words, a warning?
If this is good, I’ll take evil.
O.K.Jason.
The Bible doesn’t promote burning effigies.Just real people. For exercising their free will and THINKING. I’ll take the fryer, My Mother in Law was a believer
hanged if I want to meet up with her.
tomedgar@halenet.com.au
Tom Edgar,
“The Bible doesn’t promote burning effigies - just real people.”
It took the third time through to get it. Very funny.
First it is childish. Second it is mob mentality. Third it excludes any kind of rational approach to their differences with those who disagree with them. They probably act like that because they have no logical argument.