I’m an agnostic, but I find Richard Dawkins an embarrassment for my side, so to speak.

In his interview at Salon (either subscribe or watch an ad), conducted by Steve Paulson, the British biologist goes through his highly marketable outrage about religion. But, while he thinks he’s arguing against all “Abrahamic” religions, he’s in fact arguing against one branch of one religion. He seems to have not the slightest idea that not all religions think of faith as he characterizes it, and some “Abrahamic” religions don’t really much care about faith in the first place.

He has not done his homework. He does not recognize differences in the phenomena he’s studying. He is being a crappy scientist. And he’s stirring up hatred and misunderstanding…exactly what he accuses Religion of doing.

He ought to shut up for a while and go hang out with a variety of religious folks. Field work, Richard, field work!

I’ve been reading AKMA‘s new book, and although I hate to mention AKMA and Dawkins in the same sentence, I seem to have done so.

Faithful Interpretation: Reading the Bible in a Postmodern World is not an easy book, but it’s quite wonderful. AKMA is a terrific writer, and this book wrestles with the hardest problems in interpreting a text—most of it applies to all texts, not just to the Bible—without falling for Postmodernism’s self-hypnotic tendencies.

Does text have a meaning? Nope, AKMA answers. Meaning is not contained in the text itself. But once the easy linkage between text and meaning (with intention bundled in) goes all 404 on us, then are we left without any way to prefer one interpretation over another? Nope, AKMA answers (because any other answer leads us to trivialization and/or madness). But interpretation becomes an ethical issue, not merely a cognitive one.

The above is, of course, a simplification that does real violence to the book, which is careful and notably respectful of those who disagree with AKMA’s point of view. In that, AKMA models the “differential hermeneutics” for which he argues, an understanding of interpretation that allows for differences.

This book is written within and for the Christian tradition, but you don’t have to be Christian to appreciate the care with which AKMA approaches his topic. But you do have to be more open-minded than Richard Dawkins. But that’s ok. Even without knowing you, I’d say the chances are damn good that you qualify.

(On a lighter note, Amazon says that “Customers interested in this title may also be interested in: “The Bible – Cliff Notes” and “Numerology: Get Your Free Horoscope.”) [Tags: richard_dawkins religion AKMA christianity hermeneutics postmodernism intelligent_design evolution]

Categories: Uncategorized dw