My friend and colleague, Eric Hovind, has already blogged succinctly on Richard Dawkins’ statement that he is an agnostic rather than an atheist. This confession, that he could not be 100 percent sure that God did not exist, came in a discussion with Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. I want to comment on Dr. Williams’ part in the discussion.
According to the report in the Daily Telegraph:
At one point he told the professor that he was “inspired” by [the] “elegance” of the professor’s explanation for the origins of life — and agreed with much of it.1
Dawkins has rightly pointed out many times that his evolutionary view of origins and his belief that there is no God are impossible to separate. Williams therefore agrees with a view of how life came to be, which is not only profoundly unbiblical, but also attempts to explain life without reference to God. If Dawkins is less than 100 percent sure that God does not exist, Williams is in the position of believing that God does exist, but is completely irrelevant and might as well not exist. To all intents and purposes, the Archbishop of Canterbury is a practical atheist. At least Dawkins, for all that I disagree with his nonsensical views, holds those views with honesty and integrity. The Archbishop is a blind guide, and Jesus told us where blind guides lead us.
- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102740/Richard-Dawkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html ↩