Compare and Contrast role model: Richard Dawkins Essay

When choosing a percentage model according to my Christian worldview in that location are several positions taken into account. Their position and belief on Sexuality, complaisant Issues, and the Nature of God are areas in which our agreeing or disagreeing is a major(ip) contributing factor throughout the decision making appendage. Because of our foundational beliefs, Richard Dawkins does non congruous the most lenient of qualifications according to my Christian worldview in order to allot as a consumption model.According to my Christian worldview a usage model can be defined as a mortal whose belief system being based upon their acceptance that God is the precedent of the universe, has sent his only begotten Son as the sacrifice for sin, and swear the Holy scriptures are the inerrant and infallible word of God. Richard Dawkins once stated, inheritable engineering is important for the future of the gentle species and that our emerging technology of repair certain human cells will affect individual broker pussycat in order to dictate human carriage and sexual practice (Harris, 1984).This program line implies humankind posses the knowledge of what it takes to stimulate a person and to determine their sexual behavior outside of the Christian worldview. In believe human behavior has a genetic basis whereby altering specific genes we can create individual as we see fit is the very premises that Adolf Hitler employ when attempting to create a master race.Professor Dawkins believes the possibility of engineering human being exist where my Christian worldview says, biblical scriptures provide the necessary accuracy on God not only creating humankind but as well that Gods Holy Spirit will affect human behavior without gene manipulation. The Christian worldview beliefs on sexual behavior differ from Professor Dawkins suggesting it is genetically based. Christianity teaches, humanity was created in the image of God (Genesis 126), God determines the gender of a child, and God has the ability to change the deviant behavior of people.As I continued efforts towards invalidating Richard Dawkins as a possible place model his questionable stance on abortion came to mind as I read an article entitled Abortion and Dawkins Fallacious beak of the So-called Great van Beethoven Fallacy. The article discussed Professor Dawkins ethical and moral understanding on abortion as it relates to the Great Beethoven Fallacy and religion. Though he bible does not speak active aborting a child directly, scripture does make a distinction in the midst of cleanup spot as a result of an act of God and killing as a result of premeditation ( exodus 2112). Christianity foundational belief in Jesus and the teachings of Jesus stands against all forms and efforts to stop procreation among humankind. God enchantment speaking words of encouragement to Jeremiah says, Before you were in the belly I formed you and before you came out I gave you purpose or a r eason for living (Jeremiah 15).In other words, the Christian worldview stands against backup abortion or any form of human population book efforts that cause the death of Gods children. Professor Dawkins opinion differs from a person sacramental manduction in the Christian worldview by claiming, The measuring stick for abortion is the poor of the fetus (McLachlan, 2009). Professor Dawkins proposing questions such as Does the pregnant woman or the family suffer is immaterial when God identifies with the fetus before the birthing process begins.In addition to the fetus or the family suffering in note to aborting the child, consideration was also placed on the mental aspects of the family. For instance, terminating pregnancy receivable to psychological issues, health of parents or number of children could also be a deciding factor in aborting the child. The final area used to command out the possibility of Professor Dawkins serving as a role model for me or anyone with a Christi an worldview was his foundational belief concerning the existence and genius of God.Professor Dawkins book entitled The God Delusion, fictional characterization of God in saying, The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction jealous and proud of it a petty, unjust, unappeasable control-freak, a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser a misogymstic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, fihcidal, pestilential, megalomamacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously vicious bully (Baker, 2009, p. 75). During his childlike rant Dawkins proved, he was incapable of serving as a role model to anyone whose foundational belief was Christianity.By questioning Gods sheer(a) authority, Dawkins implied God was unable to judge humankind righteously. A person with a limited understanding of scripture yet posses the Christian worldview may step challenged as they read Dawkins statement of God as being jealous. In all actuality the Biblical scriptures con tained in the book of Exodus speaks of God being jealous but not in the context of Professor Dawkins statement. By definition, Dawkins reasoning meant someone that is envious of another because of his or her achievements and advantages.The difference in Dawkins definition of jealousy and the Holy Scripture is in the interpretation of Exodus 205, which does not pertain to the sin of jealously but kinda the act of giving someone else something (Worship) that only belongs to God. In closing, Professor Richard Dawkins is not a person I would choose to be a role model based on the following facts, his belief that gene manipulation will determine the outcome of human behavior as compared to my believing God created us individually without gene manipulation.Professor Dawkins stance for backup abortion says the measuring stick should be the suffering of the fetus, mother and father, as compared to my believing God identifies with us before we are formed in the mothers womb. Finally, the a rgument that nullifies any chance that Professor Dawkins live up to the qualification of serving as my role model was his characterizing God as having the same sinful nature of humanity.