We often hear of the so-called “new” atheists getting great laughs from their audiences at the expense of the Christian worldview. While even though they weren’t Christians, the new atheists have shown no regard for differences of worldviews by lumping Christians together with the Moslems, who hijacked the airplanes during the 9/11 Tragedy. Facts don’t seem to matter to them, unless they happen to be their own facts. It is “religious people” not political terrorists who run airplanes into tall buildings! If that gets the laughs or the cheers from their philosophically and theologically challenged audiences and adds another buyer to the list that would make their latest book a best seller, then such half-truths are worthy of expression.
My last vestige of “hands off religion” respect disappeared in the smoke and choking dust of September 11th 2001, followed by the “National Day of Prayer,” when prelates and pastors did their tremulous Martin Luther King impersonations and urged people of mutually incompatible faiths to hold hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the first place.
Notice that “religion” is claimed to be the reason people fly airplanes into tall buildings. Yet, not even all Moslems would support what was done in 2001. The 9/11 Tragedy probably had more to do with attacking western (especially American) politics than with the religious affiliation of those who organized and participated in the event, thus relegating the above statement entirely false. We need to remember, when considering the cause of the 9/11 Tragedy, that those airplanes targeted commercial and military buildings, not the Vatican or Westminster Abby. The religious beliefs of the participants had little to do with the entire plot.
If this isn’t enough to show what little regard the new atheists have for truth, some of them seek to put a new face upon history, as well. For example, the Christianity of history arose not out of an empty tomb but out of a myth. That’s correct! The new atheists presume to tell us with a straight face that Jesus didn’t even exist. Never mind that historians such as Thallus, Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the Younger etc. mention him in their records. Rather, those men either didn’t know what they were talking about, or, what is written in their accounts about Jesus is the result of Christian interpolation—and this without any proof beyond expressing their subjective analysis of the works of those ancient authors.
Some have made the charge that God’s vanity is clearly expressed in the Bible in the fact that it claims God made man in his image. In other words “God is like a vain toy maker creating dolls that look just like him.” This would reflect the perspective of the new atheists’ worldview, but viewed another way the same act of creation expresses “…a humble, self-giving, other-centered Being.” In other words God, as Creator of the universe, is sharing his authority (authority is part of his image) with mankind, whom he has created. Mankind has kingly authority over what the hand of God has made, and this privilege has not been retracted because of our rebellion. On the contrary, we remain in authority over everything within our realm of influence, even when such authority is exercised unwisely, and its source goes unacknowledged.
 As I said HERE, this current theme about “making sense of the Old Testament God” is based upon the book: Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan. These are my thoughts about his book. He may or may not agree with the impression his book has made upon me, but I thoroughly enjoyed reading what Paul wrote and recommend his book to anyone who is looking for a good read concerning defending our faith.
 Richard Dawkins, The Devil’s Chaplain (2004)
 Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster? (Grand Rapids: Baker Books – 2011), page 28-29)
 Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster? (Grand Rapids: Baker Books – 2011), page 27.