Agreeing with Richard Dawkins

It may come as a shock to some people, but there are certain things that biblical creationists and atheists agree on. One of those is the rejection of knowledge, but we come at this concept from different directions. Atheists have materialistic presuppositions, and biblical creationists have (or should have) Bible-based presuppositions.

Surprisingly, we can agree with C. Richard Dawkins on this, that knowledge is a moral issue. But we strongly disagree with his assumptions.

It's interesting that Clinton Richard Dawkins would say that those of us who reject evolution fall into four categories: ignorant, stupid, insane, or wicked. Seriously? Many brilliant and sane people reject evolution, so that leaves the possibility of wicked to consider. He's assuming that his naturalistic worldview regarding science somehow gives him insight into morality. There are atheist tinhorns who call biblical creationists "evil", but cannot justify their accusations. That's some mighty convoluted logic, old son. In fact, for an atheist to say something is wicked or wrong, he is tacitly appealing to the God that he knows exists. We can agree with Dawkins to some extent, because God's Word says that people who deny God's existence are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness (see Rom. 1:18-22).
Our most prominent global-village atheist, Richard Dawkins, said a few years ago, “If you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).”

That’s us creationists. And despite his coy demurrals, his subsequent public statements suggest that he is all too ready to consider us not just stupid but wicked.

I’ll let Dawkins’ four adjectives structure my article, but I’ll reveal my main point up front: I actually agree with Dawkins on something very important, the idea that knowledge is a moral issue.
To read the rest or download the audio version, click on "Atheists Agree: Truth Is a Moral Issue".